NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, Chairperson, Balvinder Singh, Member (Technical)
Macquarie Bank Limited - Appellant
Versus
Uttam Galva Metallics Limited – Respondent
Company Appeals (AT) (Insol) No. 96 of 2017
Decided On : 17-07-2017
ORDER :
Appellant "Macquarie Bank Limited", a company incorporated under the laws of Singapore, having its Office at 10, Marina Boulevard, # 17.01, Tower-2, Marina Bay Financial Centre, Singapore- 018983 claiming to be the 'Operational Creditor', preferred the application under Section 9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as 'I & B Code) seeking to set in motion the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the respondent "Uttam Galva Metallics Limited" (alleged to be the 'Corporate Debtor').
2. Learned Adjudicating Authority ( National Company Law Tribunal), Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh, by impugned order dated 1st June 2017, having noticed that the demand notice under Section 8 of 'I & B Code' was issued through an Advocate of Singapore and that the appellant has not enclosed any certificate from a 'Financial Institution' maintaining the accounts of the 'Operation Creditor' in terms of Clause (c) of sub-section (3) of Section 9 of the 'I & B Code' held that the petition preferred by appellant, a foreign company having office at Singapore, under Section 9 was not maintainable.
3 Before deciding the issue, it is desirable to notice the relevant facts and the provisions of 18; B Code'.
4. The appellant, a foreign company is not constituted under Companies Act 1956 or/Companies Act 2013, having account with one 'Macquarie Bank', Australia. The appellant has no office in India, nor any account with any of the Bank or 'Financial Institution' as defined under sub-section (14) of Section 3 of 'I & B Code', which reads as follows:-
3. In the Code, unless the context otherwise requires: -
(14) financial institution" means—
(a) a scheduled bank;
(b) financial institution as defined in section 45-I of the Reserve Bank of India Act 1934 (2 of 1934);
(c) public financial institution as defined in clause (72) of section 2 of the Companies Act, 2013 (18 of 2013); and
(d) such other institution as the Central Government may by notification specify as a financial institution;"
5. Admittedly, Macquarie Bank, Australia is not a scheduled bank in India nor is a 'financial institution' as defined under Section 45-I of Reserve Bank of India Act 1934 (2 of 1934). The Macquarie Bank, Australia also do not come within the meaning of 'Public Financial Institution' as defined in clause (72) of Section 2 of Companies Act 2013 (18 of 2013). The Central Government has also not issued any Notification specifying 'Macquarie Bank' for the purpose of sub-section (14) of Section 3 r/w Section 9 of 'I & B Code'. 6. Section 9 of 'I & B Code' deals with application for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process by 'Operational Creditor'. Clause (c) of subsection (3) of Section 9 mandate the 'Operational Creditor' to file the application 'in the form and manner accompanied with such fee as may be prescribed' and also directs the 'Operational Creditor' to furnish along with application a copy of the certificate from the 'Financial Institution' maintaining accounts of the 'Operational Creditor' confirming that there is no payment of unpaid operational debt by the 'Corporate Debtor', as apparent from the provision, as quoted below:-
(1) After the expiry of the period of ten days from the date of delivery of the notice or invoice demanding payment under sub-section (1) of section 8, if the operational creditor does not receive payment from the corporate debtor or notice of the dispute under sub-section (2) of section 8, the operational creditor may file an application before the Adjudicating Authority for initiating a corporate insolvency resolution process.
(2) The application under sub-section (1) shall be filed in such form and manner and accompanied with such fee as may be prescribed.
(3) The operational creditor s
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.