Tribunal grants jurisdiction in Company Petition under Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code 2016

The Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear the Company Petition under section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, as the Corporate Debtor did not contest it. The Corporate Debtor admitted default and liability, leading to the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). An Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) was appointed to manage the Corporate Debtor during CIRP, with specific responsibilities outlined. The Tribunal's decision was based on the petition meeting legal requirements, the default amount exceeding the minimum under the IBC, and the Corporate Debtor's acknowledgment of liability.

---

---

Issues:
1. Jurisdiction of the Tribunal to hear the Company Petition under section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
2. Default in payment by the Corporate Debtor and admission of liability.
3. Admission of the Company Petition and initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).
4. Appointment of Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) and management of the Corporate Debtor during CIRP.

Jurisdiction of the Tribunal:
The Company Petition was filed under section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 by the Operational Creditor against the Corporate Debtor, citing a default in payment. The Corporate Debtor, a private company incorporated under the Companies Act, 2013, did not dispute the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that the petition was within the limitation period, and as the Corporate Debtor's registered office was within the jurisdiction of the Bench, it had the authority to adjudicate the matter.

Default and Admission of Liability:
The Operational Creditor alleged that the Corporate Debtor failed to make a payment of a substantial sum, leading to a default as of 24.12.2019. The Corporate Debtor, through its counsel, admitted its inability to pay the debts and chose not to file a reply to the petition. The Tribunal noted an email from the Corporate Debtor acknowledging the liability, along with the date of default. This admission of liability and default established the Corporate Debtor's failure to meet its financial obligations.

Admission of Company Petition and CIRP Initiation:
After considering the arguments and evidence presented, the Tribunal concluded that the Operational Creditor's petition met all legal requirements. The default amount exceeded the minimum stipulated under the IBC, and the Corporate Debtor's admission of liability further supported the petition. Consequently, the Tribunal admitted the Company Petition and ordered the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the Corporate Debtor.

Appointment of IRP and Management during CIRP:
The Tribunal approved the appointment of Mr. Sandeep Jawaharlal Singhlal as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) for conducting the CIRP. The IRP was tasked with specific functions as per the IBC, and the management of the Corporate Debtor was to vest in the IRP during the CIRP period. Additionally, the Operational Creditor was directed to deposit a specified sum with the IRP for expenses related to issuing public notices and inviting claims. The Tribunal issued various directives regarding communication of the order, compliance reporting, and management responsibilities during the CIRP.

This detailed analysis of the Tribunal's judgment covers the issues of jurisdiction, default, admission of the Company Petition, and the appointment of an IRP comprehensively, outlining the legal reasoning and outcomes of each aspect of the case.

---