NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH COURT II Item No.114 IA 1501/2020 IN C.P. (IB)/1562(MB)2017 CORAM:

SHRI SANJIV DUTT SHRI ASHISH KALIA HON’BLE MEMBER (TECHNICAL) HON’BLE MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

ORDER SHEET OF HEARING (HYBRID) DATED 06.02.2026 NAME OF THE PARTIES : Percular Shipping & Trading Inc Vs Dadi Impex Pvt. Ltd.

For Applicant/SBI : Adv. Subhash Gupta For R-4 : Adv. Ahmed Padela i/b The Law Point U/s 9 of (IBC)

_________________________________________________________________________

ORDER

IA 1501/2020

1. This Application is filed by the Applicant, State Bank of India being the lead Financial Creditor of the Corporate Debtor seeking following reliefs:-

(a) “This Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased direct the Respondent No.4 to pay the Corporate Debtor the sum of Rs.20,10,78,333.57/-;

(b) that this Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to initiate appropriate action against the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 for violations of their respective duties as Resolution Professionals of the Corporate Debtor;

(c) That pending hearing and final disposal of this Application, that this Hon'ble Tribunal direct the Respondent No. 4 to deposit the sum of Rs. 20,10,78,333.57/- with the Registry of the Hon'ble Tribunal to secure the interest of the Applicant and Corporate Debtor;

(d) That this Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to grant ad interim and interim reliefs in terms of Prayers (a) to (c) above”.

2. The Application has been filed seeking directions against Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 (Erstwhile IRP and RPs of the Corporate Debtor) for violation of their duties under the IBC (hereinafter referred to as “the Code”) and against Respondent No.4 for receiving payment of Rs.20,10,78,333.57/- during the subsistence of moratorium in preference to the other CoC members. It is submitted that the assets of the Corporate Debtor were wrongfully utilized during CIRP to satisfy pre-CIRP dues of Respondent No.4 (Shinhan Bank), a Financial Creditor in preference to the other creditors and stakeholders of the Corporate Debtor.

3. In their separate replies furnished by Respondent Nos.2 and 3, it is submitted that the Corporate Debtor had availed pre-shipment credit facilities known as Export Packing Credit (EPC) from the Applicant Bank as working capital loan for the purpose of execution of orders received from its overseas customers. The Corporate Debtor was also enjoying export bill discounting facility from Respondent No.4 under which Respondent No.4 would give an advance to the Corporate Debtor in its EPC account maintained with the Applicant Bank by discounting the bills of the Corporate Debtor for which Respondent No.4 would later receive payments from overseas buyers of the Corporate Debtor. It is thus submitted that the payments received by Respondent No.4 from the overseas buyers were not the receivables of the Corporate Debtor and that such payments received by Respondent No.4 in furtherance to the bill discounting facility can never fall within the ambit of Section 14 of the Code as the same is never an asset or property of the Corporate Debtor in terms of Section 18(1)(f) of the Code.

4. Respondent No.4 in its Affidavit in Reply has stated that the Corporate Debtor had been availing a letter of Credit Backed Export Sales Bill Discounting facility from it. As per the terms of this facility, a letter of credit would be issued by the Bank of the overseas buyer, guaranteeing that the buyer’s payment to the seller will be received on time and for the correct amount. It is submitted that the arrangement between the Corporate Debtor and Respondent No.4 was akin to a transfer or assignment of debt whereby the Corporate Debtor relinquished its dues from the overseas buyer as Respondent No.4 paid the Corporate Debtor immediately through the bill discounting facility. It is pointed out that a payment of Rs.20,10,78,334/- was due and payable to the Respondent No.4 under the bill discounting facility as on the date of initiation of CIRP. Respondent No.4 accordingly filed its claim with the th