Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2017 (3) TMI 1707

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....008, was sanctioned a Term Loan of  Rs.24 crores and a Cash Credit Limit of Rs. 1 Crore by State Bank Of India (for  'SBI'). Pursuant to the sanction, SBI had distributed in tranches  brevity  commencing from 30.01.2008, a sum of Rs. 23.50 Crores towards Term Loan and  the component of Cash Credit Limit of Rs.l Crore has not been disbursed as of  date as the project is yet to be completed.   3. The Corporate Debtor has been irregular in servicing the loan, in relation to  Both interest payment and principal repayment and despite restructuring of the loan on 16.01.2009 and rescheduling the repayment, the Corporate Debtor  remains a persistent defaulter till today.   4.  In the said circumstances SBI had issued a recall notice to the Corporate  Debtor recalling the  loan on 01.11.2012 demanding repayment of  Rs.33,93,00,617.24 as on 31.10.2012 along with applicable interest without any  avail, which forced SBI to file O.A.No.188 of 2013 under the Recovery of Debts  Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (for brevity the 'RDDBFI Act')  before the Debt Recovery Tribunal....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... accounts as well as the fact of assignment and in this connection pointed  out that in the audited financial statements for the year 2013-14 the auditors  have given a qualified opinion which reads as follows:-   BASIS FOR QUALIFIED OPINION   1) Financial Statements have been prepared on going  concern basis in spite of notice issued by ALCHEMIST ARC dated 21.07.2014 for recovery of its dues of  Rs.45,34,13,224.78 (outstanding balance as certified  by the management of the company as at 31.03.2014  is u/s 13(2) read with section  13(13) of Securitization and Reconstruction of  Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest  Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). The Company also has long  term fund deficiency. These factors raised doubts  about the company's ability to continue as a going  concern which is depend upon infusion of long term  funds of its pay off the outstanding amount of the  term loan and/or sale of the fixed assets to pay off  the amount. No provisions has been made in the  accounts for additional interest, penal interest,  liquidate  damages  ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d  Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of  Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) dated  21.07.2014 for the amount of Rs. 45,34,13,224/- (outstanding balance as certified by the management of  the company as at 31.03.2014 is In  case the settlement does not come in force or settled at the higher amount more than shown in the balance sheet  then that difference amount will be contingent liability  which will be not more than Rs. 17,20,29,058.39 as at  31.03.2014.   9.  Taking into consideration the records produced it is submitted by the  Learned Counsel for the Financial Creditor that the Corporate Debtor is heavily  indebted not only to it but also to other Secured Creditors as well as Unsecured  Creditors and that there is a clear case for initiation of the Insolvency Resolution  Process as contemplated under the IBC for the benefit of all the stake holders.   10.  Even though the IBC does not expressly contemplate an opportunity of  hearing being granted to the Corporate Debtor nor filing of Objections, the  Corporate Debtor was given the opportunity keeping in view....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nto consideration the above  decisions and the overwhelming evidence placed before us to establish the claim  of the Financial Creditor in our view it is, prima facie established that the  Corporate Debtor is heavily involved in debts as at present it is not able to service  even the interest component, leave alone the repayment of the principal amount  due to the Financial Creditor. It is also evident from Annexure P 16 filed by the  Financial Creditor which is extracted from MCA portal relating to Corporate Debtor which relates to charges registered. It reveals that there are other  Financial Creditors as well, to whom amounts are owed. However from Annexure  P 16 it is further seen that in relation to some of the loans for which the  properties of the Corporate Debtor had created charges have been satisfied as  recently as 27.04.2016 evidencing that the Corporate Debtor is having cash flow  and is in a position to service loans. However in relation to the Term Loan taken  originally from SBI and subsequently assigned by it to the Financial Creditor  herein the Corporate Debtor has defaulted is clearly evident in te....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ses to be borrower(s) of assignor Bank and becomes borrower(s)  of assignee bank. In view of the above position of law we are unable to appreciate  the contentions of the Corporate Debtor. It is also to be noted that for invoking  the provisions of Section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act, NPA may be a criteria but in  relation to unfolding the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process as  contemplated under the IBC, NPA classification is not a condition precedent and  proceedings pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi will not be a bar for  this Tribunal in considering the instant petition. Further it is also not seriously  disputed by the Respondent when learned counsel for the Petitioner/Financial Creditor apprised this Tribunal about the status quo order by stating that it was  issued to protect the possession of the assignee 'financial creditor' and therefore  it would not be affected by triggering insolvency process which has been invoked  by the Petitioner itself.   14. It is also pertinent to note that the Insolvency Resolution Process as  contemplated under the IBC is for the benefit of all stakehol....