Ashish Kadam And Anr vs Nagpur Nagarik Sahakari Bank Ltd & Anr

Mr. Aashish Kadam & Anr. ....Appellants

Vs. Nagpur Nagarik Sahakari Bank Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents

For Appellants: Mr. Shikhil Suri, Ms. Nikita Thapar, Ms. Madhu Suri, Ms. Vikita Thapar, Ms. Mahima Aggarwal, Advocates.

For Respondents: Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Ms. Aakansha Nehra, Ms. Sakshi Digvijay, Advocates for R1. Mr. Ravi Raghunath, Ms. Rathina Maravarman, Ms. Aakashi Lodha, Advocates for Intervenor.

ORDER

(Through Virtual Mode)

21.04.2022: This Appeal has been filed against the order dated

15.03.2022 passed in C.P No.73/(IB)-MB-V/2021 by which order the

Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Mumbai Bench, has

admitted the Application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Code, 2016 ("Code" for short) filed by the Financial Creditor-'Nagpur Nagarik

Sahakari Bank Ltd.'.

2. When this Appeal was taken on 01.04.2022, Learned Counsel for the

Appellant stated that he is ready and willing to make the payment of

Rs.7,66,00,000/- by Monday and further adjournment was taken on

06.04.2022 to endeavor the Appellant to make the payment. 2

3. Today, when the matter was taken, Learned Counsel for the Appellant

submits that he was not able to make the payment as noted in the orders

passed by this Tribunal.

4. Learned Counsel for the Appellant proceeded to argue the Appeal on

merits. The submission which has been raised by Shri Shikhil Suri is that the

document by which Secured Cash Credit Facility was extended to the

Corporate Debtor is not a stamped and on account of document having not

been stamped, the said document could not have been relied on in passing of

the order in Application under Section 7.

5. We have perused the impugned order. In para 7 of the impugned order,

document executed by the Corporate Debtor has been noticed. One of the facts

which has been noticed is that present is a case of mortgage by deposit of title

deed. Even if the facility agreement was not stamped, there was other

materials on the record which clearly prove the financial debt which was owed

by the Appellant, hence, we do not find any error in the order of the

Adjudicating Authority admitting the Application under Section 7. We, thus,

are of the view that there is no merit in the Appeal and Appeal deserves to be

dismissed.

6. Learned Counsel for the Appellant lastly contended that an opportunity

of two weeks' more be granted to enable the Appellant to make the payment of

Rs. Rs.7,66,00,000/- as was noticed in the order dated 01.04.2022.

7. We are of the view that in event, the Appellant is able to make the

payment within two weeks from today, it will be open for the Appellant to make

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 355 of 2022 3

an Application before the Adjudicating Authority who shall pass appropriate

order on the said Application, if settlement, if any takes place. We further

observe that in the event the payment is not made as directed, after two weeks

the Committee of Creditors shall be constituted. If settlement is made, the

Application submitted by the Appellant shall be considered by the

Adjudicating Authority in accordance with the law.

8. With these observations, the Appeal is dismissed.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Dr. Alok Srivastava] Member (Technical)

[Shreesha Merla] Member (Technical)

Anjali/nn

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 355 of 2022