669

An appeal filed by the Corporate Debtor through its Director against CIRP admission order passed under Section 7 of the Code is not maintainable – Krystal Stone Exports Ltd. Vs. Stressed Assets Stabilization Fund and Anr. – NCLAT New Delhi

In this case, an application filed under Section 7 of the Code, 2016 by Financial Creditor against Corporate Debtor has been admitted by NCLT vide order dated 03.05.2024. An appeal against this order was filed by the Corporate Debtor through one of its directors who has been authorised by a board resolution dated 01.12.2023.

Hon’ble NCLAT referring the case in Innoventive Industries Ltd. v. ICICI Bank and Anr. (2017) ibclaw.in 02 SC held the appeal at the instance of the CD against the order of admission passed under Section 7 of the Code is not maintainable.

An appeal filed by the Corporate Debtor through its Director against CIRP admission order passed under Section 7 of the Code is not maintainable – Krystal Stone Exports Ltd. Vs. Stressed Assets Stabilization Fund and Anr. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

Encashment of Bank Guarantee would not impact the assets of the Corporate Debtor, only difference will be that instead of Creditor, the claim against the said amount from the Corporate Debtor will be shifted and will have to be raised by Bank – The National Small Industries Corporation Ltd. Vs. Sh. Prabhakar Kumar Liquidator of Sh. Ganesh Equipment Pvt. Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi

Hon’ble NCLAT referred the Sec. 14(3)(b) held that:

(i) The Moratorium was envisaged to ensure that the Corporate Debtor’s Assets are not liquidated or reduced till the CIRP is completed. The idea behind Moratorium was that no additional stress is brought on the business which is being rescued.
(ii) Since the assets of the surety (Bank) are separate from those of the Corporate Debtor, encashment of Bank Guarantee would not impact the Assets of the Corporate Debtor. Only difference will be that instead of the Appellant, the claim against the said amount from the Corporate Debtor will be shifted and will have to be raised by the Canara Bank.
(iii) In the instant case, the Appellant has raised the demand on the Bank for payment which was guaranteed by the Bank much prior to the initiation of the CIRP. No recovery is being made from the Corporate Debtor and therefore there is no threat immediately to the Assets of the Corporate Debtor.

Encashment of Bank Guarantee would not impact the assets of the Corporate Debtor, only difference will be that instead of Creditor, the claim against the said amount from the Corporate Debtor will be shifted and will have to be raised by Bank – The National Small Industries Corporation Ltd. Vs. Sh. Prabhakar Kumar Liquidator of Sh. Ganesh Equipment Pvt. Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

If measures u/s 13(4) of SARFAESI Act, 2002 were taken up by a Secured Creditor and at a later stage having withdrawn, the Secured Creditor intends to move to measures u/s 14, there is no restraint under the law – Diamond Entertainment Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Religare Finvest Ltd. – Delhi High Court

In this case, constructive possession of the mortgaged property was taken by Secured creditor in terms of Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. In writ petition, Secured Creditor withdrew the notice and will take such further action under the SARFAESI Act as it may be legally entitled to. Thereafter, an application was filed u/s 14 of the SARFAESI Act and the CMM passed the order allowing the said application.
Borrowers submits that once application was disposed of, the concerned CMM had become functus officio. He could not have passed further orders on the said application for extension in the absence of there being specific affidavit with respect to the disclosure required under first proviso of Section 14(1) of the SARFAESI Act.

If measures u/s 13(4) of SARFAESI Act, 2002 were taken up by a Secured Creditor and at a later stage having withdrawn, the Secured Creditor intends to move to measures u/s 14, there is no restraint under the law – Diamond Entertainment Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Religare Finvest Ltd. – Delhi High Court Read Post »

RP is at liberty to approach local police – Sajjan Kumar Dokania (RP of M/s Divya Jyoti Industries Ltd.) Vs. Mr. Gopal Nyati & Ors. – NCLT Indore Bench

NCLT directs the Suspended Management to handover all the documents, assets to the RP and provide assistance as required by the RP within ten days from the date of this order, failing which the RP is at liberty to approach local police on the basis of this order and local police to render all necessary assistance to RP.

RP is at liberty to approach local police – Sajjan Kumar Dokania (RP of M/s Divya Jyoti Industries Ltd.) Vs. Mr. Gopal Nyati & Ors. – NCLT Indore Bench Read Post »

Whether internal dispute between the Banks with regard to generation of money out of the sale assets of the Corporate Debtor can be decided by Resolution Professional / Adjudicating Authority – State Bank of India Vs. Punjab National Bank & Ors. – NCLAT New Delhi

Login with GoogleOR Username Password Remember Me     Forgot Password In case you’ve already logged in, click here

Whether internal dispute between the Banks with regard to generation of money out of the sale assets of the Corporate Debtor can be decided by Resolution Professional / Adjudicating Authority – State Bank of India Vs. Punjab National Bank & Ors. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

Scroll to Top