TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (10) TMI 1284
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....behalf of financial creditor (copy of letter of authority is annexed as annexure 1). 3. The respondent/corporate debtor "M/s. U. P. State Spinning Co. Ltd." is a company incorporated on August 20, 1974 under the provision of the Companies Act, 1956, bearing Identification Number U17111UP1974SGC003964. The authorized share capital of corporate debtor company is Rs. 933,000,000 and paid-up share capital is Rs. 932,443,000). 4. The company is involved in spinning, weaving and finishing of textiles. 5. Brief facts related to application are as follows : (i) The applicant stated that corporate debtor were enjoying the financial assistance from the applicant and initially financial assistance were provided. The corporate debtor including contingent liabilities was to the extent of Rs. 700 lakhs since 1989 in which cash credit (hypothecation of goods and book debts) facility amounting to Rs. 190 lakhs, bills purchase limit was Rs. 150 lakhs and DA of Rs. 100 lakhs overall called working capital limit. (Copy of the sanction letter dated September 25, 1989 and security documents (mortgage deed) is annexed as annexures 6, 9, 10 and 11), and the same was renewed from time to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....February 6, 2018 and August 2, 2018 written by the applicant annexed as annexure A24. (e) Copy of the registration of charge registered by the Registrar of Companies (copy is annexed as annexure 8). (v) It is further stated that the applicant has also proposed the name of Mr. Anupam Tiwari to act as IRP. (vi) The records also shows that the applicant has enclosed several documents in support of their claim. 6. It is a matter of record that the corporate debtor has filed a reply to present application stating that : (i) The corporate debtor started incurring loss in 1992 and thereafter, in order to revive the condition matter was referred to the BIFR and hence on October 21, 1992 the corporate debtor was declared sick, thereafter, a scheme was submitted, with the consent of the financial creditor. Wherein it was agreed upon that the payment would be made after the disposal of the matter before the BIFR. (ii) Further stated that during pendency of the above matter, the applicant moved to the DRT by filing O. A. No. 445 of 2014 which still remains pending and stated that applicant also initiated proceeding under section 14 of the Securit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... plus a simple interest of 9 per cent. on the amount outstanding after April 1, 2019. Moreover, a total liability of Rs. 1,07,30,941.20 occurring out of interest levied on the outstanding payment, has been agreed to be waived by the financial debtor. It is provided under the proposal that the corporate debtor will pay the entire liability by June 30, 2019. A photocopy of the one-time settlement scheme passed on March 18, 2019 and communicated on March 19, 2019 is already on record. And on this ground, he prayed adjournment, which was turned down. (vii) In this application, the corporate debtor also mentioned this fact that by two cheques bearing Nos. 025529 and 025530, dated March 8, 2019 the corporate debtor has already paid Rs. 50 lakhs, i. e., Rs. 25 lakhs each by two separate cheques. (viii) On the last date of hearing, i. e., September 26, 2019 another application has been filed on behalf of applicant under rule 11 read with rule 32 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016, praying therein to dismiss the company petition on the ground of limitation and he referred the judgment of the hon'ble Supreme Court passed in Civil Appeal No. 4952 of 2019 in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as been admitted by the corporate debtor. 8. I have heard the argument of learned counsel of the applicant and perused the record available. 9. It is matter of record that the corporate debtor in its reply to the IB application has only stated about the financial problem of the corporate debtor and stated about the plan, how to pay the debt to the financial creditor and so admitted the default. The corporate debtor has only objected on the ground of limitation and in support of such contention relied on the judgment of the hon'ble Supreme Court in matter of Gaurav Hargovindbhai Dave v. Asset Reconstruction Co. (India) Ltd. [2019] 8 Comp Cas-OL 250 (SC) (Civil Appeal No. 4952 of 2019) stating that present matter is barred by limitation as account of the corporate debtor was declared NPA on March 7, 2013 and applicant/financial creditor has filed this application much after 3 years, i. e., on September 17, 2018. 10. Since, it is admitted by the corporate debtor that the financial debt is due and the corporate debtor has raised the point of law that since, NPA was declared on March 7, 2013 therefore, the limitation runs from that date. Hence, at this juncture, I would als....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er affidavit and lastly on July 30, 2018 by sending this letter, acknowledged the debt of financial creditor and, therefore, in view of section 18 of the Limitation Act, fresh period of limitation will start from July 30, 2018 and not from March 7, 2013 the date on which the corporate debtor claimed NPA was declared and that is the reason, the financial creditor has not referred the date of NPA in Part 4 column 4 of the application. 13. Apart from the aforesaid facts, this Adjudicating Authority further finds by filing supplementary counter affidavit on September 11, 2019 the corporate debtor in paragraph 4 admits that by two cheques Nos. 025529 and 025530 dated March 8, 2019 he has deposited Rs. 50 lakhs, which was also amount to the acknowledgment of debt. So, for the reasons discussed above, in my opinion, the decision upon which the corporate debtor has placed reliance, the facts of that decision is different from the facts of the case in hand. Here in the case in hand, the financial creditor has not claimed the default from the date when NPA was declared, i. e., on March 7, 2013 rather he claimed default from July 30, 2018 the date when corporate debtor has sent the letter ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ial creditor to satisfy itself that a default has occurred. It is of no matter that the debt is disputed so long as the debt is 'due', i. e., payable unless interdicted by some law or has not yet become due in the sense that it is payable at some further debt. It is only when this is prove to the satisfaction of the adjudicating authority may reject an application and not otherwise." 18. In the case of Ajay Agarwal v. Central Bank of India [2018] 208 Comp Cas 402 (NCLAT), the hon'ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal held as follows : "When in case a 'corporate debtor' commits a default of financial debt, the Adjudicating Authority has merely to see the records of the information utility or other evidence produced by the 'financial creditor' to satisfy itself that a default has occurred. Other considerations, such as the existence a dispute or discrepancy are irrelevant, so long it has not been disputed the same debt is due and is payable to the financial creditor and the corporate debtor has defaulted." 19. Recently in the matter of Karan Goel v. Pashupati Jewellers (Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1021 of 2019, dated October 1....