TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (1) TMI 452
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016. 2. The Petitioner enclosed sanction letter dated 03.06.2013 which shows that following facilities were sanctioned to the Corporate Debtor; Sr. No. Nature of Facility Amount 1 Term Loan I 63,00,000.00 2 Term Loan II 18,00,00,000.00 3 Term Loan III 4,00,00,000.00 4 Term Loan IV 3,00,00,000.00 5 Bank Guarantee 22,15,000.00 Total 25,85,15,000.00 3. The Petitioner had enclosed the following documents in respect of the facilities sanctioned to the Corporate Debtor; a) Agreement of Term Loan dated 18.06.2013 executed by the Corporate Debtor for Rs. 3 crores. b) Agreement of Term Loan for Immovable Property dated 18.06.2013 executed by the Corporate Debtor for Rs. 3 crores. c) Counter Guarantee Agreement dated 18.06.2013 executed by the Corporate Debtor for Rs. 22,15,000/-. d) Agreement of Guarantee dated 18.06.2013 executed by Mr. Rajendra Chand for Rs. 25,85,15,000/-. e) Agreement of Guarantee dated 18.06.2013 executed by Mrs. Priti R. Chand for Rs. 25,85,15,000/-. f) Common Agreement dated 18.06.2013 executed by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Petitioner has not disclosed a letter dated 14.03.2015 addressed to the Corporate Debtor wherein it was stated that the default occurred in July 2014 but in the petition the date of default was shown as 1.10.2014. The nondisclosure of the letter or even the mistake in the date of default cannot absolve the liability of the Corporate Debtor and the contention that this has been done to get favourable orders from this Bench does not hold water. e. The Corporate Debtor contends that the Petitioner by letter dated 20.10.2014 granted a fresh term loan of Rs. 16.5 crores with effect from 24.09.2014 apart from renewing the other term loans to the extent of outstanding due as on that date, that being the situation the occurrence of default on 01.10.2014 that too just few days before the new sanction and renewal of loan is not correct and in fact at no point of time the Corporate Debtor defaulted. For this contention the Petitioner responded saying that even though the aforesaid sanction was granted, the loan was not disbursed. This Bench is of the view that since it was categorically said in the sanction letter dated 20.10.2014 that the bank has discretion to revoke or cancel,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....this cannot come in the way of admission of this petition. j. The Corporate Debtor submits that the claim is barred by limitation. However, a mortgage was registered on 29.02.2012 in favour of the Petitioner by the Corporate Debtor and hence, the claim is not barred by limitation. Further there was a payment of Rs. 56,00,000/- on 19.12.2014 by the Corporate Debtor and also the Corporate Debtor executed and registered the Deed of Extension of Mortgage on 20.12.2014. In view of this, the Corporate Debtor's reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "B. K. Educational Services Private Limited vs. Parag Gupta and Associates" (2018 SCC OnLine SC 1921) which holds that Limitation Act, 1963 is applicable to IBC proceedings, is of no assistance to the Corporate Debtor. k. The Corporate Debtor relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "S. P. Chengalvaraya Naidu vs. Jagannath and Ors." (1994) 1 SCC 1 submits that, Petitioner's case is based on falsehood and it has no right to approach this court and this Petition can be summarily thrown out. The Corporate Debtor contends that the Petitioner wilfully suppressed the latest s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....SARFAESI Act, 2002; money suit etc." Hence this contention also fails. 6. This Adjudicating Authority, on perusal of the documents filed by the Creditor, is of the view that the Corporate Debtor defaulted in repaying the loan availed and has also placed the name of the Insolvency Resolution Professional to act as Interim Resolution Professional and there being no disciplinary proceedings pending against the proposed resolution professional, therefore the Application under sub-section (2) of section 7 is taken as complete, accordingly this Bench hereby admits this Petition prohibiting all of the following of item-I, namely: I (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 of its assets or any legal right or beneficial interest therein; (c) any action to foreclose, recover or enforce any security interest created by the Corporate Debtor in respect of its property including any action under th....