2019 (1) TMI 1313

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dvocate JUDGMENT SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, J. The 1st Respondent- 'Mr. Sunil Paramanand Kewalramani' filed an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as "I&B Code') for initiation of 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process' against 'Medilux Laboratories Pvt. Ltd.'- ('Corporate Debtor'). The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad, by impugned order dated 2nd February, 2018 admitted the application, passed order of 'Moratorium' and appointed 'Interim Resolution Professional' with certain directions. 2. Respondents 1st to 3rd claimed to be a 'Financial Creditors'; their application under Section 7 of the 'I&B Code' was signed by....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cannot be treated to be a 'Financial Creditors' as mere grant of unsecured loan does not amount to 'Financial Debt' within the meaning of Section 5(8). 7. Referring to Form No-1, it was submitted that unsecured loan of 2nd and 3rd Respondents clearly reflected that there was no term of payment of interest provided therein and the amount cannot be treated to be investment by the Respondents in consideration for the time value of money. It was submitted that Mr. Sunil Parmanand Kewalramani was one of the Directors and 2nd and 3rd Respondents are relatives i.e. father and sister respectively. 8. The 1st Respondent being Director of the 'Corporate Debtor', he managed to get interest free unsecured loan from his father and sister i.e. 1st ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of 2nd and 3rd Respondents was not maintainable. 12. There is nothing on the record to suggest that 2nd and 3rd Respondents had given the loan in favour of the 'Corporate Debtor' which can be termed to be 'disbursement of an amount for consideration for the time value of money' as required under Section 5(8). Merely grant of loan and admission of taking loan will ipso facto not treat the 2nd and 3rd Respondents as 'Financial Creditors', till they show that it complies with the substantive definition or any one or other clause of Section 5(8). 13. Mere fact that the company paid interest @ 12% per annum, during certain period cannot be the ground to hold that the 'debt' comes within the meaning of 'Financial Debt' to treat the 2nd and....