NCLT JUDGEMENT ON SECTION 5(7), 5(8), 7, 7(1), 7(2), 7(3), 7(5), 7(5)(A), 7(7), 8, 8(1), 8(2), 9, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 31(1), 33 OF THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CODE, 2016, RULE 4, 4(3), 6 OF THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY (APPLICATION TO ADJUDICATING AUTHORITY) RULES, 2016, SECTION 13(2), 17 OF THE SECURITISATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ACT, 2002 AND SECTION 433(E) OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956

  

NAME		MOBILE NO.	E-MAIL I’D
RANJEET KUMAR		8383098478, 9667769795	rk@courtkutchehry.com
JAI THAKUR		8130703334, 9355723300	jai.thakur@courtkutchehry.com
RAJEEV RANJAN		9334553249	rajiv.ranjan@courtkutchehry.com
ASHOK MISHRA		9718327746	sales@courtkutchehry.com
RAVI KUMAR			ravi.singh@courtkutchehry.com

Jammu And Kashmir Bank Ltd Vs. Vinayak Rathi Steels Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd, (2020) 06 NCLT CK 0029

NCLT dismissed the application filed by the applicant, under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for brevity 'code') read with Rules 6 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority), 2016 (for brevity 'the Rules') to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution process in respect of CD. While dismissing the application NCLT held that as we have already mentioned this fact that the loan has not been repaid by the CD which is due and payable and Hon'ble Supreme Court In Innoventive Industries Limited Vs. ICICI Bank reported in 2018 (1) SCC 407 which we have referred above, held that there is difference between Section 9 of IBC, 2016 and Section 7 IBC, 2016. The moment it is established that there is a default in payment of Financial debt by the Corporate Debtor, which is due and payable and the application is complete and no disciplinary proceedings is pending against the proposed RP then the Adjudicating Authority has no option but to admit the application. So far dispute is concerned like Section 9 of the IBC, 2016, there is no scope to raise the disputes. Therefore, the averments made in the reply and Written submission of the Corporate Debtor that Financial Creditor has already taken the possession of the immovable property which sale proceed would be sufficient to satisfy the debt is not liable to be accepted.