Application for Corporate Insolvency Rejected: Lack of Debt Proof

The Tribunal dismissed the application for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the Corporate Debtor as the Applicant failed to prove the existence of a financial debt and default. The order allows the Applicant to pursue other legal remedies and does not prejudice any other legal proceedings between the parties.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Whether the transaction of Rs. 70 Lacs constitutes a financial debt under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016.
2. Whether the Corporate Debtor defaulted in repayment of the alleged financial debt.
3. Whether the application under Section 7 of the IBC is maintainable.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Whether the transaction of Rs. 70 Lacs constitutes a financial debt under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016:

The Applicant, M/s Padmavati Agrico (India) Private Limited, contended that the transaction was a loan disbursed on 18.12.2015 at an interest rate of 16.20% p.a., repayable on demand. The Corporate Debtor, M/s Green Teak (India) Pvt. Ltd., argued that the amount was an investment for a period of 10 years and not a loan. The Tribunal noted that while there was a disbursal of Rs. 70 Lacs, there was no written financial contract to substantiate the claim of a loan. The Tribunal emphasized that the burden of proof lies on the Applicant to establish the existence of a financial debt, which the Applicant failed to do.

2. Whether the Corporate Debtor defaulted in repayment of the alleged financial debt:

The Applicant claimed default based on dishonoured cheques and TDS deductions. However, the Tribunal found that the Applicant failed to link the dishonoured cheques directly to the alleged loan amount of Rs. 70 Lacs. Additionally, the Tribunal held that mere deduction of TDS towards interest does not constitute acknowledgment of debt or default. The Tribunal concluded that the Applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to prove that the Corporate Debtor defaulted on a financial debt.

3. Whether the application under Section 7 of the IBC is maintainable:

The Tribunal reiterated that to initiate a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under Section 7 of the IBC, the Applicant must prove the existence of a financial debt and default. Since the Applicant failed to establish the transaction as a loan and did not prove default, the Tribunal found the application under Section 7 of the IBC to be non-maintainable. The Tribunal dismissed the application, stating that the Applicant could pursue other legal remedies available under the law.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal dismissed the application for initiation of CIRP against the Corporate Debtor, concluding that the Applicant failed to prove the existence of a financial debt and default. The order does not prejudice any other legal proceedings between the parties and allows the Applicant to seek other legal remedies.

---