TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 158
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vocates for R2. Mr. Samar Kushwaha and Ms. Shivangi Nanda, Ms. Kavita Vinayak, Advocates for Intervenor Mr. Shambo Nandy, Advocate for IRP. ORDER Heard Learned Counsel for the parties. 2. This Appeal has been filed against the Order dated 14th July, 2022 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata) in CP (IB) No. 1786/KB/2019. By which Order, the Adjudicating Authority admitted the Application filed under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as "The Code") by the Respondent -Financial Creditor-Smt. Vrinda Karnani against the Corporate Debtor-Vindhya Industries Pvt. Ltd. for debt totalling Rs. 15,89,632/- which included interest till the date of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....so rejected by the Adjudicating Authority and held that there was default hence the Application was admitted. 6. This Appeal was taken by this Tribunal on 22nd July, 2022 and following Order was passed: "22.07.2022: Heard Shri Abhijeet Sinha, Learned Counsel for the Appellant. Learned Counsel for the Appellant challenging the order raised various submissions questioning the admission of Application under Section 9 of the IBC. He also submits that in any view of the matter the amount claimed of Rs. 15,89,632/- which he is ready to deposit in the Court subject to outcome of the Appeal. 2. Learned Counsel for the Resolution Professional is present. He submits that the publication of notice has already been issued and he visited the offic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that the Applicants also have claims against the Corporate Debtor and they are entitled to be part of the Committee of Creditors. 9. We have heard Learned Counsel for the parties and have perused the record. 10. Learned Counsel for the parties have made elaborate submissions regarding maintainability of the Application under Section 7 of the Code. It is submitted that Under Section 2 of the IBC, Partnership and Proprietorship Firms are separate entities as provided under Section 2(f) which has not yet been notified under the IBC. Learned Counsel for the Respondent relying on the Judgement of the Adjudicating Authority where reliance has been placed on the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of "Amway India Enterprises Pvt.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er than 31.03.2010: a. Magan Lal Daga Self Rs. 2567440 b. Usha Daga Wife Rs. 1136653 c. Magan Lal Daga HUF HUF Rs. 1776279 d. Devashish Daga Son Rs. 686418 e. Vrinda Karnani DaughterRs. 1253828" 13. The name of the Financial Creditor is mentioned at paragraph 5 (e) and amount referred was Rs. 12,53,828/-. 14. From the perusal of the facts and materials on record, it does appear that the family was carrying a business and business dispute has arisen between the parties. The proprietorship Company i.e. The Mining and Engineering Corporation had carried out various business. The Amounts were pooled by the Family Members including Financial Creditor. 15. This Court had by its Order dated 22nd July, 2022 on the offer made by t....