Tribunal admits petition under Insolvency Code, appoints Resolution Professional

The tribunal admitted the petition under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, declaring a moratorium and appointing an Interim Resolution Professional. The respondent, a stock broking company, was found not to qualify as a Financial Service Provider and was deemed a Corporate Debtor. The debt claimed by the applicant was confirmed as due and in default, with discrepancies in the respondent's documents noted. The tribunal concluded that the petition met the requirements for admission under Section 7 of the Code, leading to the granting of the petition and initiation of the insolvency resolution process.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the applicant qualifies as a financial creditor under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
2. Whether the respondent, being a stock broking company, qualifies as a Financial Service Provider (FSP) and is thus excluded from the definition of a Corporate Debtor.
3. Whether the debt claimed by the applicant is due and in default.
4. Whether the petition meets the requirements for admission under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Qualification of Applicant as Financial Creditor:
The applicant filed a petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking reliefs under Section 7(5)(a) and Section 13(1)(a)(b)(c) of the Code. The applicant provided finance and security margin to the respondent since 26.12.2017, amounting to Rs. 1,01,74,984.56 by way of actual payments and Rs. 2,58,93,350 by way of shares and securities. The applicant furnished copies of bank statements and ledgers to support the claim of unpaid debt by the corporate debtor. The respondent contended that the applicant does not fall under the definition of a financial creditor as defined under Section 5(7) of the Code, arguing that the applicant was merely a client of the respondent company for stock trading.

2. Qualification of Respondent as Financial Service Provider (FSP):
The respondent argued that it is a Financial Service Provider (FSP) within the meaning of Section 3(17) of the Code, being registered with SEBI as a stockbroker, and thus does not fall under the definition of Corporate Person under Section 3(7) of the Code. The respondent relied on various judgments to support this claim. However, the tribunal observed a thin line of difference between the provisions of Section 3(16)(e) and the business activities of the respondent. The tribunal concluded that the respondent, being directly involved in buying, selling, or subscribing to financial products for and on behalf of the applicant, does not qualify as an FSP but falls under the definition of a Corporate Debtor.

3. Debt Due and Default:
The tribunal found that the applicant had provided finance and security margin to the respondent, and the respondent had not shown any documents regarding the filing of any suit/legal proceedings for the recovery of the claimed amount. The applicant furnished multiple ledgers and bank statements to show that the debt had not been paid and that the corporate debtor was unable to pay its debts. The tribunal observed discrepancies and illegalities in the ledgers and invoices issued by the respondent, indicating manipulation to avoid liability. The tribunal concluded that the debt is due and there is a default on the part of the corporate debtor.

4. Requirements for Admission under Section 7:
The tribunal noted that the amount of debt payable by the respondent is more than the statutory limit prescribed under Section 4 of the Code. The applicant furnished the copy of Written Communication of the Proposed Interim Resolution Professional in Form-2. The tribunal concluded that the application is complete in all respects and the corporate debtor has committed default in paying the dues to the applicant. The tribunal was satisfied that the requirements of Section 7 of the Code were fulfilled, and thus, the petition deserved to be admitted.

Conclusion:
The petition was admitted, and a moratorium was declared prohibiting the institution or continuation of suits or proceedings against the corporate debtor, transferring or disposing of assets, and recovery of property by an owner or lessor. The tribunal appointed an Interim Resolution Professional to act under Section 13(1)(b) of the Code. The order of moratorium shall continue until the completion of the corporate insolvency resolution process or until the tribunal approves a resolution plan or passes an order for liquidation.

---