TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (1) TMI 1218
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rporate Debtor namely Innoventive Industries Ltd. availed Rs. 40,74,57,388 as Term Loan facility, Rs. 21,80,00,000 as Working Capital facility, and $7 million as External Commercial Borrowing facility, but when the Respondent company later defaulted in making payments, this applicant says the default occurred on 30.11.2016 for Rs. 12,22,10,737 towards RTL facility, Rs. 7,50,05,661 towards Working Capital facility and Rs. 11,47,58,969 towards External Commercial Borrowing facility. Since the aforesaid facilities have not been recalled, the total outstanding amount payable by this corporate debtor is Rs. 1,019,177,034 as on November 30, 2016 and the Corporate Debtor is liable to pay the outstanding amount together with interest cost, expenses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the Corporate Debtor in this interim application is, since Industry, Energy and Labour Department of Maharashtra passed the above reliefs suspending the liabilities of the Corporate Debtor and remedies against the debtor for one year from 22.7.2016, this financial Creditor could not have invoked this relief on the ground default occurred in relation to the debt owed to the creditor ignoring the order passed by the said Department declaring all liabilities and the reliefs thereof been suspended until 21st July 2017. 4. To fortify his argument, the counsel of the Corporate Debtor submits that the Maharashtra Relief Undertaking (Special Provisions) Act is armoured with non-obstante clause in section 4 with overriding effect, which is as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....otification; (iv) any right, privilege, obligation or liability accrued or incurred before the undertaking was declared a relief undertaking and any remedy for the enforcement thereof shall be suspended and all proceedings relative thereto pending before any court, tribunal, officer or authority shall be stayed; ..............." 5. The counsel of the Corporate Debtor further submits that Non-Obstante clause in Section 238 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 as against Non-Obstante Clause in MRU, both operate in different fields, one for realisation of the credit facility availed by the Debtor and another for preventing unemployment in the Industry, since the later object is more laudable cause protected by the state,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enforcement is suspended and not existence/continuation of debt or default itself, therefore suspension of indebtedness or default has not been contemplated or provided under the MRU Act. 9. He further submits, as per Section-7, only the fact of the event of default has to be ascertained, and no other determination has been envisaged under the Code for admission of the application u/s 7 of the Code and the Tribunal is only required the documents specified under the Code, if in the event of the same are not sufficient or there is any defect in the application, the Tribunal has discretion to direct the Applicant to rectify the same. In view of the same, the Applicant Counsel submits that the Notification given by the Industry, Energy and L....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd also by IBC but with different objectives, in MRU Act, it is to protect the interest of employees and in IBC, it is for protecting the creditors who have supplied fuel to the company to make it run. Since the liability suspended under MRU Act being inconsistent with the default occurred to the debt payable to the creditor, this order will not be against the ratio decided by Hon'ble Apex Court in Vishal N Kalsa v. Bank of India and Others (2016) 3 SCC 762 (Para 113) therefore, this Bench having not noticed any merit in the argument of the Corporate Debtor Counsel, the Application filed by the Corporate Debtor is hereby dismissed. 14. The corporate debtor filed another application saying notice has not been served to the debtor, but....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....including any action under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002; the recovery of any property by an owner or lessor where such property is occupied by or in the possession of the corporate debtor. 2. That the supply of essential goods or services to the corporate debtor, if continuing, shall not be terminated or suspended or interrupted during moratorium period. 3. That the provisions of sub-section (1) shall not apply to such transactions as may be notified by the Central Government in consultation with any financial sector regulator. 4. That the order of moratorium shall have effect from 17.1.2017 till the completion of the corporate insolvency resolution process....