TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (6) TMI 349
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....prayed for, was incorporated on 28.07.1983 having its registered office at 62, Najafgarh Road, New delhi-110015. Since the registered office of the respondent corporate debtor is in New Delhi, this Tribunal having territorial jurisdiction over the NCT of Delhi is the Adjudicating Authority in relation to the prayer for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process in respect of respondent corporate debtor under sub-section (1) of Section 60 of the Code. 3. It is appropriate to mention that the applicant is a public company incorporated on 11.02.2002 under the Companies Act, 1956 and was assigned identification number U65999MH2002PLC134884. The registered office of the applicant company is at The Ruby, 10th floor, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West) Mumbai-400028. 4. Mr. Srinivasa Yekabote, Chief Manager of the applicant company was duly authorized by the Power of Attorney dated 08.12.2017 of the applicant company to sign and file the present application for initiation of corporate insolvency resolution process in terms of provisions of the Code. 5. The applicant has proposed the name of Shri Ram Ratan Kanoongo, for appointment as interim resolution professional h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., in favour of applicant vide assignment agreement dated 14.03.2013. Thereafter, in May 2017 the applicant initiated recovery proceedings against respondent corporate debtor before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. Since the financial debt has been legally assigned and transferred to the applicant by assignment agreement dated 14.03.2013, the applicant comes within the definition of financial creditor' under sub-section (7) of Section 5 of the Code. 12. The applicant has placed on record the following documents in support of the debt sanctioned by Karnataka Bank Limited : * Renewal sanction letter dated 4th April 2008. * Hypothecation agreement securing the term loan facility of Rs. 650 lakhs dated 24th April, 2008. * Renewal sanction letter dated 13th July 2009. * Hypothecation agreement securing the loan facility of Rs. 850 lakhs dated 30th June, 2009. * Guarantee letter dated 30th June 2009 issued by the guarantors of the respondent. * Letter of credit application and agreement form dated 29th September 2009. * Guarantee letter dated 29th September 2009 issued by the guarantors of the respondent. * Guarantee l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....saged in the revival scheme under consideration before the BIFR, which in itself is sufficient evidence of existence of the liability and default on the part of the corporate debtor. 18. The material on record clearly goes to show that respondent had availed the loan facilities and has committed default in repayment of the loan amount. In an application under Section 7 of the Code it is no matter that the debt is disputed, so long as the debt is due and there has been occurrence of existence of default. What is material is that the default is at least 1 lakh. In view of Section 4 of the Code the moment default is of Rupees one lakh or more, the application to trigger Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process under the Code is maintainable. 19. The respondent corporate debtor has disputed the Assignment deed dated 14.03.2013 on the ground that it is not properly stamped as required u/s. 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 and is not is properly registered. It is contended that unless the said assignment deed is properly registered as required under the Indian Registration Act, no rights are vested or claimed by the applicant creditor against the immovable properties of the corporat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the applicant to trigger corporate insolvency resolution process under Section 7 of the code. In view of the overriding effect given in the provisions of section 238 of the Code, the initiation of proceedings before DRT is no bar for triggering insolvency proceedings under the Code. 22. Under sub-section 5(a) of Section 7 of the code, the application filed by the applicant financial creditor has to be admitted on satisfaction that; 1. Default has occurred. 2. Application is complete, and 3. No disciplinary proceeding against the proposed IRP is pending 23. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mobilox Innovations (P.) Ltd. v. Kirusa Software (P.) Ltd. [Civil Appeal No. 9405 of 2017, dated 21-9-2017] at Para 19 has observed that: "Once the adjudicating authority/Tribunal is satisfied as to the existence of the default and has ensured that the application is complete and no disciplinary proceedings are pending against the proposed resolution professional, it shall admit the application. The adjudicating authority/Tribunal is not required to look into any other criteria for admission of the application." 24. In the case in hand the responden....