TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (3) TMI 1911
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....') on the ground, that the Corporate Debtor committed default on 09.10.2018 in repayment of the financial loan granted to the Corporate Debtor to the extent of Rs. 40,00,000/-, under Section 7 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereafter called the 'Code') read with Rule 4 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016. 2. The Petitioner initially filed Form 1 claiming a sum of Rs. 61,45,745/- saying that they are entitled to charge interest @18% p.a. and accordingly claimed interest of Rs. 21,45,745/-. Subsequently, the Petitioner filed amended Form 1 claiming the Principal sum of Rs. 40,00,000/- as unpaid financial debt and excluding interest. 3. The Petitioner contends that Mr. Satindra Balde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l for the Petitioner stating that the amount of Rs. 45,00,000/- was a part payment by the Petitioner on behalf of R.K. Singh and Sai Ysh Solar for the commissioning of 500 k.w. Solar P V Power Plant project and the same has been duly accounted in the Corporate Debtor's ledger. They further submitted that since the Petitioner was demanding unreasonable commission on the ground that they got the Letter of Award for the solar power project in favour of the Corporate Debtor they have paid a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- as commission. Thus they have denied liability saying that the amount paid by the Petitioner was on behalf of M/s R. K. Singh and M/s Sai Ysh Solar towards the payment obligation under the letter of award. 7. The Corporate Debtor filed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er does not have the benefit of section 19 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Hence the claim is time barred. (c) The contents of the petition reveals that the Petitioner is a money lender with high rate of interest @18% p.a., not registered as money lender or NBFC, not authorised to carry on the business of financing and is prohibited under Section 10 of the Bombay Money Lenders Act, 1946. (d) The Corporate Debtor being an unregistered Partnership Firm, the Petitioner is barred from instituting any proceedings as provided under Section 69(2) of Indian Partnership Act. (e) The Corporate Debtor has been communicating with the Petitioner for the release of payment, for the commissioning of the solar power plant. On 04.08.2015, by an email, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r instrument issued by a bank or financial institution; h. The amount of any liability in respect of any of the guarantee or indemnity for any of the items referred to in sub-clauses (a) to (h) of this clause" 11. When the facts of this case are analysed, the financial debt claimed does not fit into any of the clauses mentioned under section 5(8) of the Code. 12. It is unclear why the Petitioner was keeping quiet for three years without asking for the principal or interest when Rs. 40 lacs is advanced to the Corporate Debtor as a financial debt except the only Demand Notice dated 25.09.2018. No document was produced in support of the loan showing this amount as a financial debt except saying that there is an oral agreement. 13. The Pet....