Moratorium applicability: defaults before the moratorium or under conditional, unfulfilled restructurings do not bar CIRP initiation.

Section 10A moratorium applies only to defaults arising on or after the moratorium start and does not bar CIRP where the alleged default predates it; conditional restructuring proposals that failed pre implementation conditions and only resulted in part payments did not novate or extinguish the original debt and therefore did not shift the date of default; and the adjudicating authority's admission stage inquiry is limited to verifying existence of a financial debt and default from records without undertaking a commercial viability assessment, so admission under Section 7 was lawful and the appeal fails.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the date of default fell within the Section 10A moratorium period (25.03.2020-24.03.2021) thereby barring initiation of CIRP; (ii) Whether the original loan was novated by the restructuring proposals dated 21.02.2020 and 29.09.2020 so that no debt was due and payable at the time of the Section 7 admission; (iii) Whether the Adjudicating Authority ought to have refused admission under Section 7 by assessing the corporate debtor's viability instead of admitting the application.

Issue (i): Whether the date of default fell within the Section 10A moratorium period (25.03.2020-24.03.2021) thereby barring initiation of CIRP.

Analysis: The Section 10A bar applies only to defaults arising on or after 25.03.2020 and Explanation excludes defaults prior to that date. Even assuming the first restructuring plan was operative, it was subsumed by a subsequent restructuring where the first instalment fell due after 24.03.2021. The restructuring proposals were contingent on pre-implementation conditions which were not fulfilled and thus did not shift the original date of default alleged in the Section 7 application.

Conclusion: The plea of bar under Section 10A fails and does not prohibit initiation of CIRP. Conclusion against the appellant.

Issue (ii): Whether the original loan was novated by the restructuring proposals dated 21.02.2020 and 29.09.2020 so that no debt was due and payable at the time of the Section 7 admission.

Analysis: Both restructuring proposals were conditional upon several pre-implementation requirements such as a favorable tariff order, creation of DSRA, proof of plant performance and availability of specified priority debt and working capital. Those conditions were not satisfied, and part payments accepted did not amount to acceptance of the restructuring or full satisfaction of the debt. Accordingly the restructuring proposals did not crystallize into novating agreements extinguishing the original debt.

Conclusion: The restructuring proposals did not novate the original loan; the debt remained due and payable. Conclusion against the appellant.

Issue (iii): Whether the Adjudicating Authority ought to have refused admission under Section 7 by assessing the corporate debtor's viability instead of admitting the application.

Analysis: The statutory scheme limits the Adjudicating Authority's admission-stage enquiry to verifying existence of a financial debt and default from records or evidence, without undertaking an extended inquiry into commercial viability. Precedents establishing the limited scope of admission and the non-justiciability of CoC commercial wisdom were applied; factual assertions of viability and billing did not contradict the existence of a large outstanding liability shown in the record.

Conclusion: The Adjudicating Authority was correct to admit the Section 7 application; the viability arguments do not warrant interference. Conclusion against the appellant.

Final Conclusion: The admission of the Section 7 application and initiation of CIRP were lawful; the appeal is dismissed and the interim stay of CIRP is vacated.

Ratio Decidendi: At the admission stage under a financial creditor's application, the adjudicating authority's role is limited to verifying existence of a financial debt and default from records or evidence; conditional restructuring proposals that have not satisfied pre-implementation conditions do not novate the original debt and do not shift the date of default for purposes of statutory moratoriums.

---