TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 315
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sand Two Hundred Twelve Crores Ninety One Lacs Forty Five Thousand Four Hundred Fifty Three and Seventy One paisa) inclusive of interest calculated up to 15th of July, 2021. 4. In response to the notice, the Corporate Debtor appeared in the matter and was granted 2 weeks time to file its reply affidavit on 20th of December, 2021. The affidavit was not filed and on 8th of March, 2022. Two weeks further time was granted subject to payment of Rs. 20,000/- as the cost. The matter was fixed on 22nd of April, 2022. 5. On 22nd April, 2022, since the reply had not been filed therefore, right to file reply affidavit was closed and the matter was directed to be listed on 10th of June, 2022. The matter was preponed to 04th May, 2022 6. On 4th of May, 2022 the arguments of the Financial Creditor were completed. For conclusion of the arguments of the Corporate Debtor the matter was fixed on 18th of May, 2022. 7. The matter was again listed on 06th of June, 2022 wherein the Corporate Debtor sought 2 weeks time to file reply to the supplementary affidavit filed by the Financial Creditor and the matter was posted for concluding the arguments on 06th of July, 2022. No reply to the supplementary....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ounsel for the parties and perused the record. 15. Mr. Shaunak Mitra Ld. Counsel appearing for the Corporate Debtor has taken 3 objections to the stand taken by the applicant. In response to the application as mentioned above, no reply affidavit has been filed by the Corporate Debtor. 16. The stand taken on behalf of the Corporate Debtor is summarized hereinafter;- i. The instant application is barred by limitation ii. Supplementary affidavit dated 17th of may, 2022 which has been filed by Sandipan Mukherjee cannot be taken on record as he is not the authorized person to file this affidavit. In view of the fact that one Smt. Kanimozhi V.C. Chief Manager of State Bank of India was authorized to filed the application etc. and this is evident from the part-I of the application. Therefore, the affidavit or any document in support thereof cannot be considered. iii. Application for the same debt is in proceedings before DRT and once these proceedings are pending parallel proceedings under Section 7 are not permitted. iv. In view of Section 10A moratorium for filing applications under IBC this application which has been filed on 30th of August, 2021 is not maintainable and th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) to mean non-payment of "debt" when whole or any part or instalment of the amount of debt has become due and payable and is not paid by the debtor or the corporate debtor, as the case may be. In cases where the corporate person had offered guarantee in respect of loan transaction, the right of the financial creditor to initiate action against such entity being a corporate debtor (corporate guarantor would get triggered the moment the principal borrower commits default due to non-payment of debt. Thus, when the principal borrower and/or the (corporate) guarantor admit and acknowledge their liability after declaration of PA but before the expiration of three years there from including the fresh period of limitation due to (successive) acknowledgments, it is not possible to extricate them from the renewed limitation accruing due to the effect of Section 18 of the Limitation Act. Section 18 of the Limitation Act gets attracted the moment acknowledgment in writing signed by the party against whom such right to initiate resolution process under Section 7 of the Code enures. Section 18 of the Limitation Act would come into play every time when the principal borrower and/or the corporate ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n on record as the same has not been filed by the person authorized, we note in the first instance the authenticity or the existence of this letter written by the Corporate Debtor in this letter dated 25th of July, 2018 has not been disputed or denied in any manner. We see it has been placed on record by a senior officer of the bank i.e., the Chief Manager and by placing it on record no prejudice can be said to be caused to the Corporate Debtor. 25. The plea of Corporate Debtor that this affidavit should not be considered is without any basis. Thus, because the affidavit has been filed by a pubic officer of the bank does not make the document to be placed on record inadmissible for consideration by us. The plea of the Corporate Debtor is thus hereby rejected. 26. Now adverting to the plea of the Corporate Debtor regarding bar of this application under Section 10A, we see the Corporate Debtor was classified as NPA on 28th of July, 2013 and the default occurred much prior to 25th of March, 2020 as indicated hereinabove. For application of Section 10A the default has to be on or after 25th of March, 2020. Therefore, the plea of applicant on the face of is not correct and is hereby r....