SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(NCLT) 1038

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
UNIFYLABS SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
KERALA STATE ELECTRONICS DEVELOPMENTCORPORATION LIMITED – Respondent
IA(I.B.C) - 356/2023



Advocates:
For the Petitioner:MARRIPATI MAHARSHI VISWARAJ

IN CP(IBC)/9/KOB/2023 (Under Rule 11 and 32 of NCLT Rules, 2016) In the matter of Kerala State Electronics Development Corporation Limited MEMO OF PARTIES:

UNIFYLABS SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED, No: 11, Rainbow Residency, Sarjapur Road, Opp. WIPRO Corporate Office, Bangalore - 560035 Petitioner/ Operational Creditor -Vs-

KERALA STATE ELECTRONICS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED Keltron house, Vellayambalam, Trivandrum

695033, Kerala … Respondent No.1/Corporate Debtor The Managing Director Kerala State Electronics Development Corporation Limited Keltron house, vellayambalam, Trivandrum - 695033 Kerala … Respondent No.2 Anoop Sathyapalan (Director)

Kerala State Electronics Development Corporation Limited Keltron house, vellayambalam, Trivandrum - 695033 Kerala … Respondent No.3 Narayana Moorthy Nilakanta lyer (Director)

Kerala State Electronics Development Corporation Limited Keltron house, vellayambalam, Trivandrum - 695033 Kerala … Respondent No.4 Bilu Balakrishna Pillai (Director)

Kerala State Electronics Development Corporation Limited Keltron house, vellayambalam, Trivandrum - 695033 Kerala … Respondent No.5 Jayaprakash Vasudevan (Director)

Kerala State Electronics Development Corporation Limited Keltron house, vellayambalam, Trivandrum - 695033 Kerala … Respondent No.6 Narayanan Vannadil (Director)

Kerala State Electronics Development Corporation Limited Keltron house, vellayambalam, Trivandrum - 695033 Kerala … Respondent No.7 The Branch Manager, Kerala State Electronics Development Corporation Limited

20, Ballygunge Circular Road, Kolkata-700019, West Bengal … Respondent No.8 Asansol Municipal Corporation Asansol Municipal Corporation, G.R Mitra Sarani, Asansol -713301, West Bengal Additionally Impleaded Respondent No.9 Order delivered on: 05.12.2023 Coram:

Hon’ble Member (Judicial) : TMT. (Retd.) Justice T Krishna Valli Hon’ble Member (Technical) : Shri. Shyam Babu Gautam Appearances:

For the Petitioner : Mr. Paturi Janardana Rao, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Vijay Narayan (Sr.), Mr. Pranoy Harilal, Advocates

O R D E R

Per Coram

1. This application is filed under Rule 11 and 32 of NCLT Rules, 206 to implead Asansol Municipal Corporation as additional respondent No.9 in CP(IBC)/9/KOB/2023, the main company petition. The company petition is filed by the applicant/operational creditor under section 9 IBC to initiate CIRP against (hereinafter ‘OC’)

Respondent No.1, Kerala State Electronics Development Corporation Limited, the corporate debtor .

2. OC states to have provided services suc(hh earse inpalafcteinr g‘C cDo’)mputer systems, servers, data center cloud, and software applications and related licenses, to Asansol Municipal Corporation (hereinafter at West Bengal, its ward and borough offices on investment revenue earning model, from 04.08.2017 till 30.06.2020, on basis ‘AMC’)

of work order dated 04.08.2017 and SLA dated 16.08.2017 issued by the CD. It is stated that the applicant invested crores of rupees and made AMC EMS project operational and usable by public. It is stated that AMC was not included as a party in the company petition as there was no direct contract/SLA between AMC and applicant. It is stated that since CD vide their reply dated 05.07.2023 state that they are unaware of the said work order with OC and are void as it is made by collusion with the then Branch manager, Mr. Arpan Chakraborty, it is found necessary that AMC be impleaded who is the ultimate beneficiary of the services of OC through CD.

3. The respondent No. that the company petition is filed for default of invoices raised under Annexure G, 1 who is the ‘CD’ state agreement dated 16.08.2017 for a value of 149,67,66,360/- which is disputed as it was executed without any proper authority or Power of attorney by the then branch head, Mr. Arpan Chakraborty. CD has produced email dated 13.06.2019 and minutes of meeting dated 08.07.2019 which show that Mr. Arpan Chakraborty was misdirecting the CD. It is stated that subsequently another company Eden Consultan

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top