Dhananjay Krishnanath Gaikwad vs Icici Bank Ltd. Anr

Mr. Dhananjay Krishnanath Gaikwad ...Appellant R/o Plot No. 56, Krushna, Avdhoot Nagar, Baramati, Pune-413 102

Vs

1. ICICI Bank Ltd Registered Office: ICIC Bank Tower, Near Chakli Circle Old Padra Road, Vadodara- 390 007 Corporate Head Office: ICICI Bank Towers, Bandra Kurla Complex, ....Respondent Badra (East), Mumbai 400 051 No. 1

2. Tuljabhavani Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. Plot No. 56, Krushna, Avdhhot Nagar, Baramati, Pune- 413 102 Through: Mr. Gaurav Adikia, Interim Resolution Professional, 703, C-Wingh Marathon Innova, G.K. Marg, Lower Parel, Respondent Mumbai - 400 013 No. 2 Present: For Appellant: Mr. Aaditya A. Pande, Advocate

For Respondents: Ms. Smriti Churiwal, Advocate for Respondent No. 1 Mr. Aakash Sherwal and Mr. Tushar Mudgil, Advocates for Respondent No. 2

ORDER

(Through: Virtual Mode)

24.08.2020 Heard learned Counsel for the Appellant.

Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No. 376 of 2020 Page 1 of 3

2. Learned Counsel for the Appellant- Shri Aaditya A. Pande is submitting

that the Appellant is ready to settle the dues of Financial Creditor- ICICI Bank

Ltd. but the Bank is not responding. Learned Counsel for the Respondent No.

1-Bank submits that the Bank will respond if a concrete proposal is received.

3. We have gone through the Appeal. Respondent No. 1- Financial Creditor

filed application under Section 7 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

(In short 'IBC') before the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law

Tribunal- Court-III, Mumbai Bench) against the Respondent No. 2- Corporate

Debtor for outstanding dues. The Application came to be admitted. Against

the admission of the Application, the instant Appeal has been filed by the

Appellant claiming to be Director of the Corporate Debtor. The Appellant

states that the Corporate Debtor has always shown interest in repayment of

the loan taken and submits that the Corporate Debtor was in grave financial

difficulty and so could not repay the loan amount. Appellant further claims

that the Adjudicating Authority should have given opportunity to the

Corporate Debtor to raise money for repayment of loan. It is stated that the

Bank is claiming more than Rs. 900 lakhs.

4. From the impugned order dated 24.02.2020 it is clear that debt due

and default in repayment was not disputed. The only grievance of the

Appellant is that time should have been given by Adjudicating Authority to

the Appellant-Corporate Debtor to pay back the Bank.

5. It is apparent from the Impugned Order as well as the Appeal and the

submissions made that till now actual settlement has not happened.

Considering the nature of proceeding under IBC, the matter cannot be allowed

Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No. 376 of 2020 Page 2 of 3 to be dragged endlessly. Adjudicating Authority considered and record shows

the debt due and default. We do not find any fault with the Adjudicating

Authority, which after giving chance to the Corporate Debtor, went ahead to

admit the Application.

6. If Appellant wants to settle, the proceeding under Section 12-A of IBC

is still available to the Appellant, if so desired.

7. We do not find any reason to interfere with the Impugned Order and

Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process initiated. It is stated that Committee

of Creditors has already been constituted.

8. The Appeal is dismissed. The Appellant is at liberty resort to Section

12-A of IBC proceeding, if so desired. The same will be processed as per law.

No orders as cost.

[Justice A.I.S. Cheema] Member (Judicial)

[Justice Anant Bijay Singh] Member (Judicial)

(Kanthi Narahari) Member(Technical) Akc/Mn

Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No. 376 of 2020 Page 3 of 3