Tribunal asserts jurisdiction over Corporate Debtor, initiates Insolvency Resolution Process

The Tribunal asserted jurisdiction based on the Corporate Debtor's incorporation within its territorial limits. Validity of the demand notice was confirmed through proper service. The disputed operational debt was uncontested as the Corporate Debtor failed to respond. The application was timely filed within the limitation period. Conditions under Section 9 of the Code were met with evidence of operational debt and default. An Interim Resolution Professional was appointed to manage the Corporate Debtor's affairs, and a moratorium was imposed, initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process with specific directives for asset management and creditor cooperation.

---

---

Issues:
1. Jurisdiction of the Adjudicating Authority
2. Validity of demand notice and service
3. Disputed operational debt
4. Timeliness of the application
5. Satisfaction of conditions under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016
6. Appointment of Interim Resolution Professional
7. Moratorium and directions issued

Jurisdiction of the Adjudicating Authority:
The Tribunal, in a case filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, considered the territorial jurisdiction as the Corporate Debtor was incorporated within its jurisdiction. The Tribunal noted the master data of the Corporate Debtor and established its territorial connection with the Adjudicating Authority.

Validity of demand notice and service:
The Tribunal examined the service of the demand notice in Form 3 dated 23.04.2019 to the Corporate Debtor. It found that the notice was properly served through registered postal receipts and email, as evidenced by the proof of delivery provided by the petitioner.

Disputed operational debt:
The Tribunal observed that despite repeated service, the Corporate Debtor did not appear and was set ex parte. The petitioner affirmed in an affidavit that the debt was not disputed by the Corporate Debtor, as no reply was received to the demand notice, outstanding dues remained unpaid, and no dispute was raised regarding the amount due.

Timeliness of the application:
The Tribunal confirmed that the application was filed within the limitation period, as it was submitted on 21.08.2019, while the default occurred on 10.11.2017, satisfying the requirement of timeliness under the Code.

Satisfaction of conditions under Section 9 of the Code:
After reviewing the complete application and supporting documents, the Tribunal found that the operational debt of Rs. 45,61,327/- was proven by the petitioner, and the default by the Corporate Debtor was established, meeting the conditions under Section 9 of the Code.

Appointment of Interim Resolution Professional:
The Tribunal appointed Mr. Alok Kumar Agarwal as the Interim Resolution Professional, directing him to manage the affairs of the Corporate Debtor in accordance with the Code. Specific directions were issued regarding the suspension of the Board of Directors' powers and the conduct of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process.

Moratorium and directions issued:
The Tribunal admitted the petition for initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, directing a moratorium on certain actions and appointing the Interim Resolution Professional to oversee the process. Specific directions were given regarding the management of assets, cooperation from involved parties, constitution of the Committee of Creditors, and regular progress reporting to the Tribunal.

This detailed analysis of the judgment provides insights into the Tribunal's considerations and decisions on various issues raised in the case.

---