TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (10) TMI 1530
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ncy and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for brevity 'the Code') with a prayer to trigger the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process in the matter of M/s Radhey Sham Tandon Manufacturing Private Limited-Corporate Debtor. 2. The Corporate Debtor-M/s. Radhey Sham Tandon Manufacturing Private Limited was incorporated on 17.02.1997. The identification number of the Corporate Debtor is U17114DL1997PTC085178 and its registered office is situated at 6189, RST House, Ground Floor, Nawab Road, Sadar Thana, Delhi-110006. 3. The Financial Creditor has proposed the name of Resolution Professional, Mr. Sameer Rastogi with the address F-116, Lajpat Nagar Part 1, New Delhi- 110024 and email id srastogiindiajuris.com. His registration number is IBBI/IPA 002/I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....secure Subordinated Debt (Term Loan- II) of Rs. 300 Lakh and Modified letter of Intent for Subordinated Debt (Term Loan- II)' dated 08.09.20 15 have been placed on record (Annexure-5 to 12). 6. The details of the security held by, or created for the benefit of 'financial creditor'-SIDBI along with the certificate of registration of charge issued by the Registrar of Companies have been placed on record which fulfils the requirements of Section 77 & 78 of Companies Act, 2013. 7. It is also submitted by the Petitioner-Financial creditor that the account of the Corporate Debtor was classified as NPA on 08.06.2016. In view of the repeated defaults on the part of the Corporate Debtor to comply with the schedule of repayment of the principal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ................. SIDBI 4,64,00,000.00 4,47,20,000.00" 11. The precise case of the Petitioner is that the total amount in default due to the Petitioner by the Respondent-Corporate Debtor as on 24.06.2019 is Rs. 7,91,84,152.00/-. A tabular chart depicting working of the amount in default is annexed (Annexure-3) 12. Subsequently an affidavit of service was filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner which showed that the service was effected by the email on the address as recorded in the master data as well as by the speed-post sent on 06.08.20 19 which was returned undelivered on 13.08.2019. Accordingly, service was complete as effected by the email. However, no one had put in appearance on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is overwhelming evidence available to prove default and name of the resolution professional has been specified who does not suffer from any disqualification. 16. Under sub-section 5(a) of section 7 of the code, the application filed by the petitioner financial creditor has to be admitted on satisfaction that: (i) Default has occurred; (ii) Application is complete, and (iii) No disciplinary proceeding against the proposed IRP is pending. In view of the above no doubt is left that there was an advancement of loan and default on part of the respondent- corporate debtor is established. Even Otherwise there is overwhelming documentary evidence on record which support those findings. 17. We further find that t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nder Section 7 of the Code. The public announcement is required to be made in all territories/areas where the business have been transacted by the Corporate Debtor so that all stakeholders may have noticed of the fact that Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process has been triggered in respect of the Corporate Debtor. 22. Before parting we wish to observe about the delaying tactics adopted by the Corporate Debtor-Respondent. In that regard it would be appropriate to refer to the orders granting time to the Corporate Debtor-Respondent for filing reply. The aforesaid position would become evident from a series of orders dated 20.08.2019, 11.09.2019 & 25.09.2019 which are set out below: "Order dated 20.08.2019 An affidavit o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has not been filed. Therefore, proceeded ex parte. Arguments heard. Order Reserved." The aforesaid details concerning the conduct of the Corporate Debtor-Respondent would reveal that a designed effort has been made to impede the insolvency proceedings by seeking time over and over again for filing reply. The leniency shown by the Bench has been misused. It was therefore, in these circumstances when cost of Rs. 25000/- was imposed for filing reply and no reply having been filed there was no option except to proceed with hearing of the case. We are constrained to observe that in some of the cases the Corporate Debtor-Respondent has deliberately delayed the proceedings so as to avoid the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolutio....