NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA, CHAIRPERSON, BANSI LAL BHAT, MEMBER(JUDICIAL)
IN THE MATTER OF:
Indian Overseas Bank - Appellant
Vs.
Mr. Dinkar T. Venkatsubramaniam Resolution Professional for Amtek Auto Ltd. - Respondent
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 267 of 2017
Decided on : 15-11-2017
ORDER :
The 'Corporation Bank'-'Financial Creditor' preferred an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as 'T&B Code) for initiation of 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process' against M/s. Amtek Auto Ltd ('Corporate Debtor'). The application was admitted on 24th July, 2017, order of moratorium was passed and 'Interim Resolution Professional' was appointed on 27th July, 2017. While declaring moratorium, the following order was passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal) Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh in terms of Section 14(1) of the 'I&B Code', as under: -
(b) transferring, encumbering, alienating or disposing of by the corporate debtor any of its assets or any legal right or beneficial interest therein;
(c) any action to foreclose, recover or enforce any security interest created by the corporate debtor in respect of its property including any action under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (54 of 2002);
(d) the recovery of any property by an owner or lessor where such property is occupied by or in the possession of the corporate debtor."
2. As per Section 17 (1) (d) of the 'I&B Code', the financial institutions maintaining the accounts of the 'Corporate Debtor' have to act on the instructions of the 'Interim Resolution Professional' in relation to such accounts and furnish all information relating to the 'Corporate Debtor' available with them to the 'Interim Resolution Professional'. The Appellant-'Indian Overseas Bank', Hosur Branch is one of the 'Financial Creditor' of the 'Corporate Debtor' and constitutes 4.08% of the total value of the financial debt. The 'Corporate Debtor' is maintaining an account with the Appellant-'Indian Overseas Bank' in its Hosur Branch to the extent of Rs.6,65,13,958/-. In view of initiation of 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process' and in terms of Section 17, the 'Interim Resolution Professional' by letter dated 1st September, 2017 requested the Appellant -'Indian Overseas Bank' to transfer the amount of Rs.6,65,13,958/- through RTGS to the bank account of the 'Corporate. Debtor' maintained with the Corporation Bank and cheque No. 870093 dated 1st September, 2017 was also enclosed with the said letter.
3. It appears that in spite of reminder to the Appellant-'Indian Overseas Bank' amount having not been transferred, notice was given to the Appellant-'Indian Overseas Bank'. The Appellant opposed the application and stated that the amount available in the current account of the 'Corporate Debtor' at Hosur Branch is neither a security interest nor an asset of the 'Corporate Debtor' and therefore, it is not liable to release the amount to the 'Corporate Debtor' and the amount available in the said current amount is to be appropriated towards the dues payable to the Appellant- 'Indian Overseas Bank'. The stand taken by the Appellant having rejected by the Adjudicating Authority and the Appellant having been directed to transfer the amount of Rs.6,65,13,958/- to the bank account of the 'Corporate Debtor' maintained with the Corporation Bank, present appeal has been preferred against the impugned order dated 13th October, 2017 in CA No. 142/2017 in CP (IB) No. 42/Chd/Hry/2017.
4. Learned counsel for the Appellant has taken similar plea as was taken before the Adjudicating Authority that the amount of 'Corporate Debtor' lying in the Hosur Branch of Appellant-'Indian Overseas Bank' was neither a security interest nor an asset of the 'Corporate Debtor' and the 'Corporate Debtor' having borrowed the amount from the Appellant- 'Indian Overseas Bank', the amount required to be appropriated to the dues.
5. Having heard learned counsel for
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.