D. Muthukumar vs A. Premkumar & Another
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 209 of 2017
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The transfer of a pending winding-up petition under Section 433(e) and (f) of the Companies Act, 1956 to the Tribunal under Rule 5 of the Companies (Transfer of Pending Proceedings) Rules, 2016 does not permit the Adjudicating Authority to treat that petition as an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 without first being satisfied that the petitioner is a financial creditor within Section 5(7) and 5(8) of the Code and that the information and documents required by Rule 5's proviso and Form-1 have been furnished; where the petitioner has not done so, the treatment of the petition under Section 7 is non-application of mind and the resulting admission order, moratorium and appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional are liable to be set aside, and the petition stands abated under the proviso to Rule 5.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
D. Muthukumar ...Appellant
Vs.
A. Premkumar & Another ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant:- Mr. Goutham Shivshankar, Advocate
For Respondents:- Mr. Biju Thankappen with Mr. Prakash Yedhola, Advocates.
JUDGMENT
SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, J.
The Respondents, A. Prem Kumar & Another originally filed an
application under Section 433(e) & (f) of the Companies Act, 1956 before
the Hon'ble High Court of Madras. The case was transferred to the
Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Chennai
Bench, Chennai, pursuant to "The Companies (Transfer of Pending
Proceedings) Rules, 2016" framed by Central Government in exercise of
the powers conferred under sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 434 of the
Companies Act, 2013 read with sub-section (1) of Section 239 of the
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as "I&B
Code").
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 209 of 2017 2
2. The Adjudicating Authority by impugned order dated 21st August,
2017 in TCP/89/(IB)/CB/2017 treated the application under Section
433(e) & (f) of the Companies Act, 1956 to be an application under
Section 7 of the 'I&B Code' read with Rule 6 of the Insolvency and
Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016
(hereinafter referred to as "Adjudicating Authority Rules, 2016"),
admitted the application, passed order of moratorium and appointed
'Interim Resolution Professional' with certain directions. The said order
is under challenge in this appeal.
3. The case of the Appellant is that prior to 2004, he along with his
wife and one Mr. P. Asokan and Mr. P. Velraj were doing real estate
business through a proprietary concern in the name and style of M/s.
K.K.Flats. During the year 2004, the said Company was floated and
ventured into a land project belonging to M/s. Madura Coats Ltd. at
Madurai by utilising the funds available with the proprietary concern and
taking further investments from different persons including Mr. P.
Asokan and Mr. P. Velraj. Thereby, the land was procured, details of
completion of the projects that the Company purchased and promoted an
amount contributed by different persons have been shown. The amount
paid by one or other persons in favour of one or other creditors has also
been detailed and it was submitted that the table shows that the
Company had paid back the investments made in it through various
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 209 of 2017 3
transactions coming to its total sum of Rs. 1,54,93,980/- (Rupees one
Crore fifty-four lakhs ninety-three thousand nine hundred and eighty
only). It is alleged that the Respondents without paying back the amount
with sole motive of unjustly enriching themselves, issued a statutory
notice on 25th October, 2014 alleging that the Company has taken loan
from them, to which, the Appellant objected.
4. Thereafter, the Respondents filed an application for winding up
under Section 433(e) & (f) of the Companies Act, 1956 before the Hon'ble
High Court of Madras. The said case was transferred to the Adjudicating
Authority, who treated the petition as an application under Section 7 of
the 'I&B Code' and passed the impugned order dated 21st August, 2017.
5. Learned counsel for the Appellant submitted that the Respondents
are not 'Financial Creditor', within the meaning of sub-section (7) read
with sub-section (8) of Section 5 of the 'I&B Code'. It was also submitted
that before admitting the application under Section 7, all facts were
required to be brought to the notice of the Adjudicating Authority, were
not pleaded.
6. The Appellant has enclosed copies of the cheques issued by Mr. P.
Asokan, apart from copies of the relevant pages of ledger book to suggest
that repayment has already been made to the 1st Respondent- A.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 209 of 2017 4
Premkumar. Balance sheets has been enclosed in support of the plea that
the due amount had already been paid to the 1st Respondent.
7. According to 1st Respondent, he approached the Appellant
Company on many occasions, seeking repayment of dues, along with the
accrued interests but the amount was not paid. Further, according to 1st
Respondent, the Income Tax Return was submitted by the Company (KK
Flats (P) Ltd) and enclosed by Appellant suggests that the amount was
taken from the 1st Respondent and shown as 'loan', relevant portion of
which is quoted below: -
KK FLATS PRIVATE LIMITED NO. 1E, SUN FLOWER APARTMENT 10, MANDABAM CROSS ROAD KILPAUK, CHENNAI-10 SCHEDULES TO BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2012 Amount in (Rs.) Particulars 31.03.2012 31.03.2011 SCHEDULE - D Unsecured Loans
Anitha R 1070224 1070224 Arun P.V. 2064647 2064647 Asokan P 1880913 1880913 Deva Kavitha 7940000 10390000 KK Flats Deva Kavitha 348500 5348500 Muthukumaar 13918058 13667758 Porkodi 961586 961586 Prem Kumar 3110382 3110382 Raja sekar 3366713 3366713 Rithu Pandey 324000 324000 Ram kumar A 2645114 2645114 Shanthi V 1708167 1708167 Others 338000 338000 Paramendra Tiwari 3450000 3450000 Rathinapandian 300000 300000 Tamilselvan 600000 0 Ajay Prakash V 1477521 1477521 Alagesan & Ajitha 500000 500000 Prakash S 100000 100000
TOTAL 52703525 46103825
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 209 of 2017 5
For M/s K K Flats Private Limited For Ravichandran & Thangaraj Associates
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
D. Muthukuma M. Devakavitha G. Thangaraj Managing Director Director Partner
Place: Chennai Date :
8. We have heard learned counsel for the Appellant and learned
counsel for the Respondents.
9. To decide the issue, it is desirable to refer the Rule framed by the
Central Government, pursuant to which pending winding up cases were
transferred from the Hon'ble High Courts to the Adjudicating Authority
(Tribunal).
The Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred under
sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 434 of the Companies Act, 2013 read
with sub-section (1) of Section 239 of the 'I&B Code' framed "The
Companies (Transfer of Pending Proceedings) Rules, 2016". Rule 5
therein relates to transfer of pending proceedings of winding up on the
ground of inability to pay debts and reads as follows: -
"5. Transfer of pending proceedings of Winding
up on the ground of inability to pay debts.- (1) All
petitions relating to winding up under clause (e)
of section 433 of the Act on the ground of inability
to pay its debts pending before a High Court, and
where the petition has not been served on the
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 209 of 2017 6
respondent as required under rule 26 of the
Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 shall be
transferred to the Bench of the Tribunal
established under sub-section (4) of section 419
of the Act, exercising territorial jurisdiction and
such petitions shall be treated as applications
under sections 7, 8 or 9 of the Code, as the case
may be, and dealt with in accordance with Part
II of the Code:
Provided that the petitioner shall submit all
information, other than information forming part
of the records transferred in accordance with
Rule 7, required for admission of the petition
under sections 7, 8 or 9 of the Code, as the case
may be, including details of the proposed
insolvency professional to the Tribunal within
sixty days from date of this notification, failing
which the petition shall abate.
2. All cases where opinion has been
forwarded by Board for Industrial and Financial
Reconstruction, for winding up of a company to a
High Court and where no appeal is pending, the
proceedings for winding up initiated under the
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 209 of 2017 7
Act, pursuant to section 20 of the Sick Industrial
Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 shall
continue to be dealt with by such High Court in
accordance with the provisions of the Act."
10. Rule 4 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to
Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 relate to "Application by 'Financial
Creditor'", as quoted below: -
"4. Application by financial creditor. ─ (1) A
financial creditor, either by itself or jointly, shall make
an application for initiating the corporate insolvency
resolution process against a corporate debtor under
Section 7 of the Code in Form 1, accompanied with
documents and records required therein and as
specified in the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of
India (Insolvency Resolution process for Corporate
Persons) regulations, 2016."
(2) Where the applicant under sub-rule (1) is an
assignee or transferee of a financial contract, the
application shall be accompanied with a copy of the
assignment or transfer agreement and other relevant
documentation to demonstrate the assignment or
transfer.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 209 of 2017 8
(3) The applicant shall dispatch forthwith, a copy of the
application filed with the Adjudicating Authority, by
registered post or speed post to the registered office of
the corporate debtor."
11. From sub-rule (1) of Rule 4 of the Adjudicating Authority Rules,
2016, it is clear that the applicant is required to provide information as
required under Form-1. Sub-rule (3) of Rule 4 of the Adjudicating
Authority Rules, 2016, mandates the applicant to provide the copy of the
application to the 'Corporate Debtor', immediately after filing of the
application.
12. As per Form-1 i.e. the format for filing an application under Section
7 of the 'I&B Code as per which following details are to be provided.
"Part I- Particulars of Applicant (Please provide for
each Financial Creditor Making the
Application)
Part II- Particulars of Corporate Debtor
Part III- Particulars of the Proposed Interim Resolution
Professional
Part IV- Particulars of Financial Debt
Part V- Particulars of Financial Debt [Documents,
Records and Evidence of Default]
I, hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge,
[name of proposed insolvency professional], is fully
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 209 of 2017 9
qualified and permitted to act as an insolvency
professional in accordance with the Insolvency and
Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and the associated rules and
regulations.
[Name of the financial creditor] has paid the
requisite fee for this application through [state means
of payment] on [date]."
As per the instructions, the following documents are required to be
attached:
"Annex I Copies of all documents referred to in this application.
Annex II Written communication by the proposed interim resolution professional as set out in Form 2.
Annex III Proof that the specified application fee has been paid.
Annex IV Where the application is made jointly, the particulars specified in this form shall be furnished in respect of all the joint applicants along with a copy of authorisation to the financial creditor to file and act on this application on behalf of all the applicants."
13. From the record we find that except for the information as
mentioned in the petition under Section 434 (e) & (f) of the Companies
Act, 1956, no further information was provided by the Respondents in
terms of Rule 5 of "The Companies (Transfer of Pending proceedings)
Rules, 2016". As per proviso, the Respondent was required to submit all
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 209 of 2017 10
information, other than information forming part of the records
transferred in accordance with Rule 7, required for admission of the
petition under Sections 7, 8 or 9 of the 'I&B Code. In the present case,
there is nothing on the record to suggest that in terms of Part V of
Form-1 'Particulars of Financial Debt [Documents, Records and
Evidence of Default]' have been supplied by the Respondents nor
copies of documents as mentioned below Part V of Form I were
provided by the Respondents. For example, the Respondents have not
filed any record of default with the information utility nor any other
record, as prescribed by 'Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India'
has been enclosed.
14. This apart, there is a doubt, as submitted by the learned counsel
for the Appellant, as to whether the 1st Respondent, A. Prem Kumar
can claim to be a 'Financial Creditor'.
15. From the Income Tax Return enclosed by the 1st Respondent, while
we find that the 1st Respondent has been treated to be a 'Creditor', but in
Schedule D, the debt has been shown to be unsecured loans. The 1st
Respondent has not brought on record to suggest that debt along with
interest, if any, has been disbursed by the 1st Respondent to the 'Corporate
Debtor' against 'the consideration for the time value of money' or that
the said money was borrowed by the 'Corporate Debtor' for one or other
purpose as shown in sub-section (8) of Section 5 of the 'I&B Code'.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 209 of 2017 11
16. The Adjudicating Authority without ascertaining the question as to
whether the 1st Respondent is a 'Financial Creditor' or not, particularly in
absence of any pleading treated the application under Section 7 of the 'I&B
Code', which shows non application of mind on the part of the Adjudicating
Authority.
17. For the reasons aforesaid while we hold that the application under
Section 433 (e) & (f) of the Companies Act, 1956 transferred to the Tribunal
cannot be treated to be an application under Section 7 of the 'I&B Code',
the impugned order dated 21st August, 2017 being bad in law, and in view
of the observations made above, is set aside. In the result, in terms of
proviso to Rule 5 of "The Companies (Transfer of Pending proceedings)
Rules, 2016", the application preferred by the Respondents under Section
433 (e) & (f) of the Companies Act, 1956 stands abated. However, it will be
open to the Respondents to move before appropriate forum for appropriate
relief.
18. In effect, order (s) passed by Adjudicating Authority appointing
'Interim Resolution Professional', declaring moratorium, freezing of
account and all other order (s) passed by Adjudicating Authority pursuant
to impugned order and action, if any, taken by the 'Interim Resolution
Professional', including the advertisement, if any, published in the
newspaper calling for applications and all such orders and actions are
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 209 of 2017 12
declared illegal and are set aside. The application preferred by
Respondent is dismissed as abated. Learned Adjudicating Authority will
close the proceeding. The 'Corporate Debtor' company is released from
all the rigour of law and is allowed to function independently through its
Board of Directors from immediate effect.
19. The Adjudicating Authority will fix the fee of 'Interim Resolution
Professional ', if appointed, and the 'Corporate Debtor' will pay the fees of
the Interim Resolution Professional, for the period he has functioned. The
appeal is allowed with aforesaid observation and direction. However, in
the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to cost.
(Justice Bansi Lal Bhat) (Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya) Member (Judicial) Chairperson
NEW DELHI 6th December, 2017 AR
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 209 of 2017
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free