TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (12) TMI 1386
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....13, bearing CIN L65190MH2004GO1148838, and a banking company within the meaning of Section 5(c) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (10 of 1949), having its registered office at IDBI Tower, WTC Complex, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400 005 and branch office at IDBI Complex, NMG Ahmedabad, Opp. Municipal Staff Quarters, Near Lal Bunglow, Off. C.G. Road, Ahmedabad 380 006. The applicant is in the banking business providing various types of financial facilities including business loans, personal loans, consumer loans, loan against property, home equity loans, term loan etc. 3. The corporate debtor is a limited company, incorporated under the provisions of The Companies Act, 1956 on 01.08.1988, duly registered with Registrar of Companies, Ahmedabad with CIN: L45200GJ1988PLC011049 and having registered office at 504, Trividh Chambers, 5th Floor, Opp. Fire Brigade Station, Ring Rod, Surat 395 002, Gujarat State. The Authorized share capital of the Respondent is Rs. 175,00,00,000/- and paid up share capital of the company is Rs. 103,64,24,000/-. The respondent company is engaged in the business of manufacturing polyester filament yarn. 4. It is submitted by the applicant that various credit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....properties owned by the corporate debtor details of which are annexed to the application. The financial creditor also holds irrevocable and unconditional guarantee of promoter directors of the corporate debtor. 8. It is further submitted by the applicant that the financial assistance sanctioned to the corporate debtor was enhanced/renewed from time to time at the request of the corporate debtor and the applicant had issued various sanction letters dated 08/06/2010, 16/07/2011, 14/06/2012, 27/09/2013, 26/04/2014, 22/08/2014, 29/09/2015, 24/08/2016 & 24/04/2017. 9. It is further submitted by the applicant that as the corporate debtor failed to repay overall credit facility granted by the applicant as per the terms and conditions of the restructuring, loan account of the corporate debtor was classified as NPA (non-performing assets) and the applicant had issued recall notice dated 08.04.2019 calling upon the corporate debtor to pay the entire outstanding amount together with accrued interest. The corporate debtor neither responded to the call notice nor made any payment. Therefore, the applicant invoked personal guarantee by letter dated 15.05.2019. Both corporate debtor and gua....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... consideration with the consortium banks, the applicant has contended that, though the proposal letter of the corporate debtor dated 05.03.2020 was marked to the applicant, no such letter was received by the applicant. Furthermore, Bank of Baroda to whom such letter was addressed, had supplied copies of said proposal letter to other consortium member banks in Joint Lenders Meeting on 17.03.2020 and all the consortium banks rejected such proposal. The applicant has further submitted that even otherwise the said expression of interest does not absolve corporate debtor from liability towards the applicant, because the proposal of M/s. Saanika Industries does not reveal that after such acquisition of 26% stake and equity infusion would be utilised for reduction of debt liability of the corporate debtor. Mr. Anil Kumar Jain who has filed objection to the application, has not disclosed his authority and supporting documents like Board Resolution. 15. The applicant filed additional affidavit inter alia stating that Joint Lenders Meeting (JLM) was likely to be held on 15.06.2022. As on 03.06.2022 none of the lenders, either verbally or in writing, had called for/proposed such JLM to be ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... not maintainable. On perusal of orders dated 12.05.2020 & 13.08.2020 issued by NCLT, Principal Bench it is found that submission of proof of default from Information Utility is mandatory only for new petitions. Therefore, the contention raised by the corporate debtor is not applicable in the instant case. Other contentions raised by the corporate debtor like expression of interest received from Saanika Industries Private Limited and application for restructuring of debt with lead bank of the consortium is pending for consideration, are for only delaying the admission of the application. Even after the present order was reserved for pronouncement, the corporate debtor filed IA 838 of 2022 requesting to hold the matter as fresh proposal is being given to the applicant IDBI Bank. On categorical statement of IDBI Bank that no proposal is pending, IA 838 of 2022 was rejected on 24.11.2022. 21. In light of the above discussions, it is evident that the debt is due and payable and default has occurred. The present application is complete in terms of Section 7(5) of the Code and is within limitation. The applicant is entitled to claim its dues, establishing the default....