Hrushikesh Balkrishna Paranjape vs Canara Bank & Anr

IN THE MATTER OF: Hrushikesh Balakrishna Paranjape ...Appellant

Versus

Canara Bank & Anr. ...Respondents

Present: For Appellant : Mr. Shmuksh Goyal, Advocate

For Respondent : Ms. Niharika Ahluwalia and Mr. Arpit Sharma, Advocates

ORDER

13.10.2022 Heard learned Counsel for the Appellant and Respondent-

Bank.

This appeal is filed against the order dated 10.06.2022 by which the

Adjudicating Authority has admitted Section -7 Application filed by Canara

Bank.

Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Corporate Debtor has

approached the Bank for OTS and it was under consideration when the

admission order was passed. Learned Counsel for the Bank submits that the

Bank has never accepted the OTS proposal and debt and default is admitted.

Hence the Adjudicating Authority did not commit any error in admitting Section

7 Application. It is submitted that CoC is also proceeding Resolution Plan under

consideration.

After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, we are of the view that

the in view of the fact that debt and default are admitted. The case of the

Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No. 685 of 2022 Page 1 of 2 Appellant that OTS was submitted, itself pre-supposes admission of the debt.

We thus, do not find any error in the order passed by the Adjudicating

Authoring, admitting Section 7 Application. We only observe that it is always

open for the Appellant and Bank to enter into settlement and in the event if any

settlement is arrived, the route of Section 12A of IBC is open to the parties.

We these observations, we dismiss the present Appeal.

(Justice Ashok Bhushan) Chairperson

(Dr. Alok Srivastava) Member(Technical)

(Mr. Barun Mitra) Member(Technical) akc/gc

Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No. 685 of 2022 Page 2 of 2