2022 (9) TMI 170

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Resolution Process in respect of respondent company, claimed to be the corporate debtor. 2. The applicant, Shri Mahalaxmi Transport Co. has filed the present application claiming as the operational creditor with the prayer for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process under the provisions of the Code. 3. The details of transactions leading to the filing of this petition as averred by the petitioner are as follows: a. The Operational creditor herein rendered transport service to the Corporate Debtor. b. The Operational Creditor submitted that there had been series of 49 invoices generated in favour of the Corporate Debtor. c. The Operational Creditor sent a Demand Notice dated 28.10.2021 demanding payment of an unpaid op....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pplicant and the Corporate Debtor. In the instant Application before examining the said application on merits, it is necessary to examine whether the said petition is maintainable in terms of Section 4 of the IBC, 2016 as the Applicant is claiming Rs. 28,98,158/-. from the Corporate Debtor as evident in the Part IV of Form 5 and the same has been filed before this Tribunal on 20.02.2021. With reference to the Judgment of Hon'ble NCLAT in the matter of Jumbo Paper Products V. Hansraj Agrofresh Pvt. Ltd. (Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 813 of 2021) wherein it was held that an)'' statute/law can be applied retrospectively only if explicit provision regarding its retrospective application is made in the statute. It is seen that notif....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....h before 24.3.2020, on which date the threshold limit was increased to Rs. 1 Crore. The Tribunal hence found that the said decision cannot be relied upon to decide whether a petition can be maintained for an amount of less than Rs. 1 Crore after 24.3.2020. The Appellate Tribunal went on to hold that the threshold limit will be applicable for applications filed under Section 7 or Section 9 on or after 24.3.2020, even if the debt is on a date earlier than 24.3.2020. The above view of the Tribunal is in consonance with the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Manish Kumar (supra). 25. Even otherwise, the Tribunal has in my opinion, gone wrong in its interpretation of Section 4 of the Act. Section 4, after amendment on 24.3.2020 clearly....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on, the application of Part II itself is taken away with effect from 24.03.2020 as far as defaults less than Rs. 1 Crore are concerned and hence no application can be filed after 24.03.2020 regarding an amount where the default is less than Rs. 1 Crore. By application of Section 10A, even in cases where the default is more than Rs. 1 Crore, an application cannot be filed for a period of six months from 24.3.2020. There can be no other understanding of the statutory provisions, as there is no ambiguity in the language. It is well settled that the grammatical and ordinary sense of the words of the Statute should he adhered to, unless that would lead to absurdity, or some repugnance or inconsistency with the rest of the provisions of the statu....