Tribunal orders Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process under IBC, appoints IRP, and mandates moratorium

The Tribunal admitted the petition and ordered the initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the Corporate Debtor, finding it in default of a debt due and payable. A moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC was ordered, along with the appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). The Operational Creditor was directed to deposit Rs. 3,00,000 with the IRP for expenses. Periodical reports on the CIRP progress were mandated, and the Registry was instructed to notify relevant parties and update the Corporate Debtor's information with the Registrar of Companies.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Limitation period.
2. Principle of res judicata.
3. Pre-existing dispute.
4. Arbitrary and excessive interest.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Limitation Period:
The Corporate Debtor argued that the petition was barred by limitation, asserting that the cause of action arose on 07.02.2013 and the winding-up petition was filed after 950 days, exceeding the 1095 days limitation period. However, the Tribunal referred to Section 14 of the Limitation Act, which allows exclusion of time spent in bona fide proceedings in a court without jurisdiction. The Tribunal calculated the limitation period, considering the time spent in previous proceedings before the Bombay High Court and this Adjudicating Authority. It concluded that after excluding 1,388 days, only 228 days had elapsed, thus the petition was within the limitation period.

2. Principle of Res Judicata:
The Corporate Debtor claimed that the petition was barred by res judicata due to the previous abatement order dated 03.10.2018. The Tribunal noted that for res judicata to apply, there must be a final judgment on the merits. Since the previous order only noted the abatement and granted liberty to file a fresh proceeding under the IBC, it did not decide on the merits. Therefore, the principles of res judicata were not satisfied, and this argument was rejected.

3. Pre-existing Dispute:
The Corporate Debtor contended that there was a pre-existing dispute regarding the quality of goods supplied. The Tribunal found no correspondence or evidence supporting this claim. The Tribunal emphasized that any communication regarding the inferior quality of goods should have been properly addressed to the Operational Creditor. Thus, this defense was also rejected.

4. Arbitrary and Excessive Interest:
The Corporate Debtor argued that the interest rate of 24% per annum claimed by the Operational Creditor was arbitrary and excessive. The Tribunal noted that the claim about excessive interest could not be entertained at this stage long after the invoices were received and acknowledged by the Corporate Debtor. Therefore, this argument was dismissed.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal found the petition complete in all respects as required by law, establishing that the Corporate Debtor was in default of a debt due and payable, exceeding the minimum amount stipulated under Section 4(1) of the IBC. Consequently, the Tribunal admitted the petition and ordered the initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the Corporate Debtor. The Tribunal also ordered a moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC and directed the appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) by a separate order. The Operational Creditor was instructed to deposit Rs. 3,00,000 with the IRP for expenses related to issuing public notices and inviting claims. The IRP/RP was mandated to submit periodical reports to the Tribunal indicating the progress of the CIRP. The Registry was directed to communicate the order to the Operational Creditor and the Corporate Debtor and send a copy to the Registrar of Companies, Maharashtra, Mumbai, for updating the Master Data of the Corporate Debtor.

---