TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (4) TMI 1036
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is Rs. 11,08,25,240.20/- (Rupees Eleven Crore Eight Lakh Twenty-Five Thousand Two Hundred and Forty and paisa Twenty Only) as on 28.03.2021. The brief facts of the case are as under: - 2. It is stated that the Corporate Debtor availed various Term Loan Facilities and Working Capital Facilities from the Financial Creditor and the Corporate Debtor defaulted in repayment of the facilities and their accounts were classified as NPA on 05.06.2018. But, later on the accounts were upgraded manually considering relaxation under MSME benefits. As the Corporate Debtor did not clear the arrears as assured by them, on 17.9.2018 the accounts were again classified as NPA with effect from 05.06.2018; the original date of classification as NPA. 3. It is stated that the securitisation measures were initiated vide demand notice dated 4.12.2018 which was subsequently withdrawn. WP(C) No. 5550 of 2019 had been filed challenging securitisation measures, and the same was disposed off recording the withdrawal of demand notice. The Corporate Debtor was directed to approach the Bank for restructuring and moratorium. After withdrawal of demand notice dated 04.12.2018, the Financial Creditor issued ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ailed to comply with its obligations under various facilities extended by the Financial Creditor as mentioned above, the present application has been filed by the Financial Creditor to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Corporate Debtor under Section 7(4) of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Submission by the Corporate Debtor 6. The Respondent/ Corporate Debtor filed objection/ reply stating that there is discrepancy in the amounts alleged to be due from the Corporate Debtor. The Financial Creditor had given different figures in its application before the DRT and in the instant Application. Even in this Application, the amounts shown as allegedly due in Part IV of Form 1 varies and does not tally with the particulars provided in the Information Utility. It is further stated that the date of classification as NPA viz., 05.06.2018 as shown in the Application (Part IV, SI. 2) is not correct even by the admission by the Financial Creditor. Financial Creditor has claimed various NPA dates as 28.05.2018, 05.06.2018 and 17.09.2018. The RBI has found that the earliest date when the account could have been classified as NPA was 17.09.2018. Despite the obj....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d instead only a letter was produced. This letter would not confer any authority on the person presenting the application. 10. It is also stated that it is well settled that IBC is a complete code in itself, and the provisions and procedures of other statutes cannot be imported into adjudication under IBC. When a summary procedure is provided by the legislature, each party has to present the evidence within the time frame provided in the statute. This is especially crucial in the case of IBC proceedings which are time bound. If a Board Resolution has indeed been passed by the Board of Directors, the Financial Creditor, with the infrastructural and manpower at its disposal, could have produced the same within the time stipulated. The Financial Creditor cannot be permitted to take a casual approach or be given any extra accommodation which in any case would be contrary to the statutory provisions. A Bank has no special privilege in IBC matters, and the provisions are as much applicable to a Bank as to any other Financial Creditor. It is also stated that the security document sought to be relied on by the Financial Creditor to sustain this Application is dated 28.03.2017. These are....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be. 14. To get further clarity on this issue, we have gone through Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 which reads as under: PART II-OTHER APPLICATION 137. Any other application for which no period of limitation is provided elsewhere in this Division. Three years When the right to apply accrues. 15. It is settled law as decided by the Hon'ble NCLAT in its order in Neelkanth Township and Construction Pvt. Ltd. vs. Urban Infrastructure Trustee Ltd. (Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 44 of 2017) that, those provisions of the IBC cannot be shackled by the Limitation Act. It was observed that: "There is nothing on record that Limitation Act, 2013 is applicable to I&B Code. Learned Counsel for the appellant also failed to lay hand on any of the provisions of I&B Code to suggest that the Law of Limitation Act, 1963 is applicable. The I&B Code, 2016 is not an Act for recovery of money claim, it relates to the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. If there is a debt which includes interest and there is default of debt and having a continuous cause of action, the argument that the claim of money by Respondent is barred by Limitation cannot be ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bunal. 18. Point No. (ii). To arrive at a definitive conclusion, with regard to this issue, we have gone through the Power of Attorney dated 21.06.2005 issued to Smt. Kochurani G. Ettil, Assistant Vice President (Legal) by the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Bank Limited. In this respect we had gone through Clause 10 of the Power of Attorney which is quoted hereunder: - "To, appear before any Judicial or Quasi-Judicial body including an Court of law, Forum, Tribunal and Banking Ombudsman, institute Suit or Appeal or applications or other proceedings either Civil or Criminal, defend Suit or Appeal or applications or other proceedings either Civil or Criminal filed against Bank, sign Vakalathnama or Plaints or Petitions or written Statements or Affidavits or appeal memorandums suits or appeals for applications or other proceedings either Civil or Criminal filed by or against Bank, receive documents-or copies of documents from Courts, Government Offices or other offices in connection with Civil or Criminal matters, complaints filed by or against Bank, give evidence or execute decrees or surrender or reassign insurance policies, receive amounts. from cou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h the Power of Attorney Holder, and the objection raised by the counsel for the Corporate Debtor is merely incongruous, and therefore, holds no water. Moreover, the Assistant Vice President of the Financial Creditor had signed the application as an authorised person of the Financial Creditor with specific authorization letter to file Insolvency Application before this Bench. Hence, the technical objection on the ground of maintainability is only for the sake of objecting and hence stands rejected. 21. Point No. (iii) From the records produced, we could find that there is a Creditor- Debtor relationship between the Financial Creditor and the Corporate Debtor, since the Corporate Debtor admitted that they received money from the Financial Creditor through various documents produced before this Tribunal and the Corporate Debtor has no case that they have repaid the money received from the Financial Creditor. After the direction of Hon'ble High Court to the Applicant to consider the grievances of the Petitioners therein (Corporate Debtor herein), in accordance with the RBI Circulars, the restructuring request of the Corporate Debtor was considered and several meetings were held. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng admitted the Application, the provisions of moratorium as prescribed under Section 14 of the Code shall be operative henceforth with effect from the date of order shall be applicable by prohibiting institution of any suit before a Court of Law, transferring/encumbering any of the assets of the Debtor etc. ii. The name of the Insolvency Professional Shri. Vinod Padinhare Veettil, suggested by the Financial Creditor is not available in the panel of IPs issued by the IBBI for the period 01.01.2022 to 30.06.2022, for Kochi Bench. In these circumstances, this Bench hereby appoints Mr. Ramachandran Thekkumkat Madathil having Registration No. IBBI/IPA-002/IP-N01071/2021-2022/13715, email id: [email protected] residing at 24-53/2, Flat B, Inscape Illam ,Ragamaligapuram, Kottappuram, Near Kottappuram Railway Gate ,Thrissur, Kerala - 680 004 whose name appears in the panel of IPs for appointment as Interim Resolution Professional for the period 01.01.2022 to 30.06.2022 for Kochi Bench, as an Interim Resolution Professional to carry out the functions as mentioned under IBC. iii. The fee payable to IRP/RP shall comply with the IBBI Regulations/ Circulars/ Directions iss....