TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (6) TMI 730
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....esolution Process has been prayed for, was incorporated on 30.08.1943 having its registered office at Near Railway Station, Jaipur Rajasthan 302001. Since the registered office of the respondent corporate debtor is in Rajasthan, this Tribunal having territorial jurisdiction over the State of Rajasthan 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 company incorporated on 19.09.2002 under the Companies Act, 1956 and was assigned identification number U74999DL2002PLC117052. The registered office of the company is at D-54, First Floor, Defence Colony, New Delhi- 110024. 4. Mr. Rahul Kumar Sharma, Senior Manager of the company was duly authorized by the Board Resolution dated 15.12.2017 of the applicant company AARCL 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 Anil Kumar for appointment as interim resolution professional having registrat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....licant towards the outstanding loans of both IDBI and SBI comes to Rs. 555,47,56,370/- as on 31.12.2017. 7. Facts which are material to the controversy raised may first be noticed. In the year 1977 due to continuous losses incurred by respondent company its management was taken over by Government of Rajasthan. On 31.03.1998 based on its accounts showing erosion of its entire net worth of Rs. 292 lacs by accumulated losses of Rs. 1714 lacs, respondent company filed a reference before the BIFR which was registered as BIFR Case No. 3/1999. It is stated that on 02.06.1999 respondent company was declared sick company. Thereafter, in absence of any revival proposal, BIFR formed a prima facie opinion to wind up the respondent company. Subsequently after considering the report of OA that neither company nor its promoters have shown any interest for the revival, BIFR confirmed its opinion to wind up respondent Company and forwarded its opinion u/s 20(1) of SICA to the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur. An appeal against the order of BIFR dated 26.09.2002 has been preferred before AAIFR. However, AAIFR rejected the appeal filed by the coordination Committee of Workers Union. 8. In ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Corporate Debtor (JMEL) in respect of deposit of title deeds of immovable and hypothecation of movables with reference to credit facilities availed from various Financial Creditors. * Copy of the loan agreement dated 21.03.1996 executed between the corporate Debtor and IDBI for availing the credit facility for an amount of Rs. 150 lakhs for purchase of equipments. * Copy of the Deed of Hypothecation dated 21.03.1996executed between the Corporate Debtor and IDBI for availing the credit facilities amounting to Rs. 150 lakhs. * Copy of the Joint mortgage deed dated 29.04.1996 executed by Shri Gori Shankar Pathak, Director and the Corporate Debtor in respect of deposit of titles deeds of immovable and hypothecation of movables with reference to credit facilities availed from various financial Creditors. * Copy of Memorandum of entry dated 11.04.1996 wherein Mr. Gori Shanker Pathak, Director, of the Corporate Debtor submitted the title of documents at the office of IFCI (acting for itself and other financial creditors). * Copy of assignment agreement dated 11.10.2017 executed between IDBI and AARCL assigning the debt in favour of AARCL. 14. Similarly in support of the SBBJ de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....spect to assets of the corporate debtor being the security held by applicant AARCL against the credit facilities available from the respondent corporate debtor. 18. That apart in support of the claim of default the applicant has placed on record copy of Audited Financial Statement for the financial Year ending on 31.03.2013 (the latest financial statement available with AARCL), which reveals that total amount of Rs. 391,72,98,134/- is payable to all the financial creditors towards credit facilities availed by the corporate debtor from the various financial creditors. The broad break-up as given in the note No. 5 to the aforesaid balance sheet is as follows: S. N. Name of Financial Amount 1. IDBI Bank (Assigned to AARCL) 121,61,82,393 2. From other banks including: 235,35,68,341 SBBJ (Assigned to AARCL) -CBI -OBC -SBI & Others 3. Jaipur Development Authority (JDA) 50,00,000 4. Rajasthan Industrial & Investment Corporation (RIICO) 93,00,000 5. Government of Rajasthan (GOR) 14,89,48,000 6. Interest on Other loans 18,42,91,400 7. Employees & Others 8,000 Total 391,72,98,134 19. It....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....initiation of SARFAESI proceedings and proceedings before DRT is no bar for triggering insolvency proceedings under the Code. 24. It is also pertinent to state here that during the hearing held on 01.03.2018 the applicant was directed to file affidavit pertaining to the present position of the winding up proceeding pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan. In compliance of the direction the applicant financial creditor has filed an additional affidavit dated 01.03.2018 affirming that "till date neither any liquidation nor any admission order has been passed in the winding up proceedings." It has further been affirmed that no provisional liquidator or official liquidator has been appointed for the respondent corporate debtor company in the winding up proceedings pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan. In addition it is confirmed in the same affidavit that the present application is not barred by the provisions of Section 11 (d) of the Code. 25. In the case of Unigreen Global Private Limited v. Punjab National Bank [Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 81 of 2017, dated 1-12-2017], Hon'ble NCLAT has held that mere pendency of a petition of winding up, where no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0. As a sequel to the above discussion and in terms of Section 7 (5) (a) of the Code, the present application is admitted. 31. Mr. Anil Kumar having registration number IBBI/IPA-001/IPP00144/2017-18/10308 residing at 303, Chadra GHS Ltd. Plot No-64, Sector-555, Golf Course Road, Sector-55, Gurgaon-122011, email id [email protected] is appointed as an Interim Resolution Professional. 32. In pursuance of Section 13 (2) of the Code we direct that public announcement shall be made by the Interim Resolution Professional immediately (3 days as prescribed by Regulations) with regard to admission of this application under Section 7 of the Code. 33. We also declare moratorium in terms of Section 14 of the Code. The necessary consequences of imposing the moratorium flows from the provisions of Section 14 (1) (a), (b), (c) & (d). Thus, the following prohibitions are imposed: "(a) The institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the corporate debtor including execution of any judgment, decree or order in any court of law, tribunal, arbitration panel or other authority; (b) transferring, encumbering, alienating or disposing of by the corporate debtor any o....