TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (9) TMI 222
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or of three Corporate Debtors. Three Corporate Debtors are (i) M/s. Shree Sai Prakash Alloys Private Limited, (Company Appeal (AT) Ins. No. 1003 of 2019; (ii) M/s. Shree Sai Rolling Mills (India) Limited, (Company Appeal (AT) Ins. No. 1004 of 2019) and (iii) M/s. Shree Sai Smelters (India) Limited, (Company Appeal (AT) Ins. No. 1005 of 2019. 2. Brief facts necessary to be noted for deciding these Appeals are: Three Corporate Debtors as noticed above had been sanctioned credit facilities by the Punjab National Bank (hereinafter referred to as "Bank"). An amount of Rs. 58,29,00,000/-sanctioned to M/s. Shree Sai Prakash Alloys Pvt. Ltd. from 26th April, 2004 to 25th July, 2014. Credit Facility of Rs. 35,80,00,000/- was sanctioned to M/s. Shree Sai Rolling Mills (India) Ltd. from 20th May, 2005 to 29th August, 2014 and amount of Rs. 15,25,00,000/- was sanctioned to M/s. Shree Sai Smelters (India) Ltd. from 20th May, 2005 to 20th August, 2014. The Account of the Corporate Debtors were declared Non-Performing Assets (NPA) by the Punjab National Bank. The Account of M/s. Shree Sai Prakash Alloys Private Limited, M/s. Shree Sai Rolling Mills (India) Limited and M/s. Sh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hority and remanded the matter back to the Adjudicating Authority to pass Order afresh. 4. Aggrieved by Judgement and Order of this Appellate Tribunal dated 18th June, 2020, both the Corporate Debtors as well as the Financial Creditor filed Appeals before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hon'ble Supreme Court heard the Civil Appeal No. 2997 of 2020 along with three other Appeals and by Judgment and Order dated 14th July, 2022 set aside the Order of this Appellate Tribunal, NCLAT dated 18th June, 2020 and restored the Company Appeals for hearing before the NCLAT. Consequently, by the Judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 14th July, 2022, these Appeals have been listed on 21st July, 2022 and has been heard by this Appellate Tribunal. It is also relevant to notice that before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Corporate Debtor again sought liberty of the Hon'ble Supreme Court to submit OTS proposal before the Bank. Hon'ble Supreme Court also noted in its Order that Bank is not agreeable to the proposal made by the Corporate Debtor which statement is recorded in the Order dated 12th July, 2021. 5. It appears that proposals were also submitted by the Corporate Debtors for Settlement with....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....posit Rs. 1.5 Crore each month. The OTS Proposal has been cancelled on 31st July, 2019. The Adjudicating Authority in paragraph 3 of the Order has noticed that Corporate Debtor has failed to comply with the terms and conditions of OTS Proposal. The Adjudicating Authority held that the Corporate Debtor defaulted in making payment towards the liability of the Bank, Company Petitions deserve to be admitted. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that efforts were also made by the Appellants to enter into OTS both before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Appellate Court but Bank has not considered to revive the OTS proposal submitted by the Appellants. Even after the Order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Bank having not accepted any further OTS proposal of the Appellants, Appellants cannot claim settlement of dues with the Bank. Even the terms and conditions of the OTS which was accepted by the Bank was not complied by the Appellant resulting cancellation of the OTS. It is well settled that although settlement between the parties to be encouraged but the Court/this Tribunal cannot direct the Bank to accept the OTS as claimed for by the Corporate Debtors. 10. We thus are of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....08/2019, parties to maintain status quo in the matter." 13. Before the National Company Law Tribunal, the Corporate Debtor filed an I.A. No. 57 of 2019 praying that in view of the Interim Order dated 19th August, 2019 passed by the Gauhati High Court, NCLT may not pronounce the order in Section 7 Applications. The Application 57 of 2019 was rejected by the Adjudicating Authority vide its Order dated 23rd August, 2019 in the Order rejecting I.A. No. 57 of 2019, following observations are made in Paragraph 3,4 and 5: "3. Before dealing with the above application, it is important to mention here that the arguments in the above company petition were heard by this Tribunal on 14th August, 2019 and the matter was reserved for orders. The learned Advocate appearing for the CD submitted before this Tribunal on 14-08-2019 that the CD is once again approaching the highest authority of the FC/bank for a settlement on 16-08-2019 and requested to adjourn the matter. In view of the above submission this Tribunal assured both the parties that this Tribunal will not pass orders before 20-08-2019 and both the parties are at liberty to inform this Tribunal on or before 20-08-2019 about t....