2022 (2) TMI 1513

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al Company Law Tribunal ["NCLT"], Amaravathi Bench at Hyderabad, wherein the application filed by the Respondent herein under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ["Code"], was allowed. 2) (i) Originally, M/s. Torus India Limited, the Petitioner Company herein was registered as a Private Limited Company under the name of Kinnera Steels Private Limited. Subsequently, it was converted into a Public Limited Company with effect from 06.06.1996. Later on, the name of the Company was changed to its present name on 31.12.1999. It is said that, the Petitioner Company which was engaged in business, sale, purchase, import, export etc., approached Industrial Development Bank of India ['IDBI'] for grant of credit facilities for fina....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in filed the present Revision. 5) Sri. Vedula Srinivas, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the Petitioner would submit that the application filed under Section 7 of Code, is beyond the period of limitation and, as such, the Tribunal could not have passed any Order. According to him, the date of default was on 01.07.2002 and an application under Section 7 was filed on 17.07.2018. He took us through the material and the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Babulal Vardharji Gurjar vs. Veer Gurjar Aluminium Industries Private Limited and others AIR 2020 SC 4668 and also the judgment in B.K. Educational Services Private Limited vs. Parag Gupta and Associates 2018 SCC Online SC 1921. He also placed on record the recent judgment of Thre....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... absence of the same, a doubt arises as to whether really such material is filed bringing to the notice of the Tribunal, namely, pendency of the proceedings from 2006 to 2016. 8) To this, the learned Counsel for the Respondent would contend that, he has filed before this Court the office copies available of the Order of the BIFR etc., and in case of any doubt, he will apply for all the certified copies and place them before the Court. 9) From the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for the Respondent, it appears that, NCLT took into account the proceedings before the BIFR while holding that the application under Section 7 is within limitation. 10) A perusal of the material on record would show that the Order impugned does not....