TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Initiates CIRP, Imposes Moratorium: Debt Admission, IRP Appointment, Structured Resolution Process</h1> <h3>REDHEX IT SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. Versus GREENLINE BUILDERS LTD.</h3> REDHEX IT SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. Versus GREENLINE BUILDERS LTD. - [2021] 13 Comp Cas - OL 1 (NCLT - Del) Issues:1. Application filed under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for initiation of corporate insolvency process.2. Claim of operational debt by the applicant against the corporate debtor.3. Submission of demand notice under section 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.4. Response of the corporate debtor regarding its inability to pay the operational debt.5. Admission of liability by the corporate debtor.6. Imposition of moratorium under section 14 of the Code.7. Appointment of interim resolution professional (IRP) and deposit requirement by the applicant.Analysis:1. The application was filed under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking to initiate the corporate insolvency process against the respondent, a company engaged in business activities. The applicant, claiming to be the operational creditor, sought to recover an unpaid operational debt of Rs. 8,43,700 from the corporate debtor.2. The operational creditor had rendered office management services to the corporate debtor, for which an invoice was issued. Despite sending a demand notice under section 8 of the Code, the operational creditor did not receive payment or any notice of dispute from the corporate debtor, leading to the filing of the petition for insolvency resolution.3. In response, the corporate debtor cited economic challenges, including losses due to the state of the economy and demonetization, as reasons for its inability to pay the debt. However, it admitted its liability and inability to settle the outstanding amount, establishing the existence of the debt.4. Consequently, the Tribunal acknowledged the admission of liability by the corporate debtor and initiated the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the company. A moratorium was imposed under section 14 of the Code, prohibiting various actions against the respondent, ensuring the protection of its assets during the resolution process.5. The Tribunal appointed an interim resolution professional (IRP) to oversee the resolution process, requiring the applicant to deposit a sum to cover immediate expenses. The IRP was directed to comply with statutory provisions and submit a report within 30 days. The order was communicated to all relevant parties and authorities for further action and compliance.By analyzing the issues involved and the Tribunal's decision, it is evident that the judgment addressed the application for insolvency resolution, the claim of operational debt, the response of the corporate debtor, the admission of liability, the imposition of a moratorium, and the appointment of an IRP, ensuring a structured process for resolving the financial distress of the corporate debtor.
TaxTMI 