In the matter of Fortune Spirit Limited

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH cP(IBl No. 13/CBl2oZ4 (An Application under section 7 of the Insoluency and. Bankruptcg code,2)l6, read tpitlt Rule 4 of the Insolueney and. Barukruptcg (Ap p lication to Adjudicatirug Autho rity ) Rures, 2 0 1 6.) In the matter of: IDBI BANK LIMITED Having registered office At- IDBI House Unit-9 Janpath Bhubaneswar-75 lO22 Through Authorised Representative Mr. Purna Chandra Majhi E m ai I I D : ps"an_s,s14j-hi@jdb-i, geg Applicant/ Financial Cre ditor Vs. FORTUNE SPIRIT LIMITED Having registered office At- Plot No.31, Kharvel Nagar, Unit-III, Bhubaneswar-75 1 000 1, Dist-Khurda, Odisha Email ID-rajeshsahu6S(@yahoo. com Respondent/ Corporate Debtor

OnppR PRowoUwCED ON: O9.O9"2O2S

Conau: Dppp CHerpna Josnr (Mevraun Juorcral) Bauwenr Lel Mppue (Mounen Tecnurcal)

Apppenarcp: Fon Appt rcANT: swenup Rer;au srucnsauaur, AovocATE Fon RpspoNDENT: LexnnrpHaR Sauoo, Apvocarp Sa- 6c

NCLT CUTTACK BENCH cP(lB) No.73/CB/202a Onopn Pen: Berl,lriaat LeL MaaNa. Mauson rocnNrcal 1. The present Application has been filed on or.os.2o24 by IDBI Bank Limited through its authorized, representative purna Chandra Majhi (hereinafter referred as " the Applicant/Financial Creditor,) seeking to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (hereinafter referred to as "CIRP") against Fortune Spirit Limited (hereinafter called "the Respondent/corporate Debtor") by invoking the provisions of section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy code,2o16 (hereinafter called "code") read with Rule 4 of Insolvency & Bankruptcy (Application to adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 for a Financial Debt of Rs" 18,50,93 ,177,221 -. 2" The averments made by the Applicant in its Apptication are as follows: i. The corporate Debtor had approached Financial creditor on 07. ll.2o 14 through its promoters and directors for a working capital limit of Rs. 15 Crore for the construction of a factory, building, and installation of machinery for the production of Indian-made Foreign Liquor ("IMFL") and in this regard submitted necessary financiatr papers along with its board resolution. ii" The Financial creditor sanctioned the loan on og.l2.2ol4 of Rs" 15 crores through a cash credit limit by way of hypothecation and also took a personal guarantee from the directors of the corporate Debtor. The interest component involved BBR + 2OO bps p"a for the said cash credit loan, and the aforesaid loan has to be repaid in 12 months and the interest to be paid as and when accrued, excluding the moratorium period. iii. on the approach of the corporate Debtor, the Financial creditor on 30.72.2o18 renewed the cash credit loan and brought down the credit loan to the tune of Rs. 12 crores on 31 .lo.2olg, 3a<

-

NCLT CUTTACK BENCH cp(tB) No. t3/cB/2024 iv" on 31"03"2021, the loan account of the corporate Debtor was declared as NPA, after which on 06.05.2o2r, the Financial creditor issued a loan recall notice to pay the outstanding dues. v. The Financial creditor on 24"os.2o21 issued a Demand Notice under section 13(21 of the SARFAESI Act, and after issuance of the Demand Notice, the Financial creditor had also issued a Possession Notice on 1r.o8"2a21 and 12,o8"2021 under section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act pertaining to different properties of the corporate Debtor. The only property mentioned in the Possession Notice dated ll.o9.2o21 had been sold to one Sasmita Acharya by way of auction sale, and the sale certificate was also issued on 06.04.2022^ vi" Then, on 27.La.2a22, the District Magistrate ordered to take possession of the property under Section L4 of the SARFAESI Act pertaining to the property of the corporate Debtor apart from the properties mentioned in the possession Notice dated 71.o8.2o21 and 72.o8.2021." Meanwhile, the Financial creditor had also filed an application before the DRT, cuttack, on 03"11.2021 to recover dues bearing case no. oA No. 4Tsl2o2l against the corporate Debtor and the guarantor, which is still in pendency. vii. on 18.12.2022 and 09"02.2o2s, the Financial creditor issued sale notices and effected paper publications for the sale of the immovable properties which are held as security by the Financial creditor, but the auction could not materialise due to the unavailability of buyers. viii" The corporate debtor had made one Time settlement ("ors") proposal for Rs. 10 crores with an upfront payment.of Rs. 1 crore on 23.02.2023, which was allowed by the Financial creditor on 12.06.2023 vide its sanction letter by revising the OTS amount to Rs.11 Crores instead of Rs.10 Crores. 9a gd =,?

NCI-T CUTTACK BENCH CP(lB) No.I3lCBl2024 ix" The corporate Debtor subsequently deposited Rs, 50 lakhs on 30.06.2023, and for the balance amount of Rs. 9.s0 crores, issued cheque no. 275055 dated 91"08.2023, which, when drawn on Axis Bank, got dishonoured due to insufficient funds" Accordingly, the Financial Creditor initiated a Criminal complaint case bearing 1. c.c No, 561412023 under section 13g of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, in the court of sDJM at Bhubaneswar, which is still in pendency. x. on o8"07"2024, the Financial creditor communicated to the Corporate Debtor that their OTS proposal was revoked as the corporate Debtor failed to honour the payment schedule as per the agreed terms and conditions of their OTS proposal" 3" The contentions raised by the Respondent/corporate Debtor in its reply are summarised herein: i" The Applicant has made a conflicting statement in regard to Part IV of the application, wherein the debt amount as on OL.O2.2024 is mentioned as Rs. 18,50,93, tTT,22l-, and the date of default is shown as 31 .O3"2021, but in the list of dates annexed at Pg No. 2 to the Application, the NpA date is shown to be 31,03"2021. So, the date of default and the date of NpA cannot be the same" ii" Further, in the Loan Recall Notice and Demand Notice issued by the Financial creditor on 06"05.2o2r, the due date of principal and interest amount is mentioned as 30" to.2o2o, which means that default as per the record of the Applicant bank itself took place on 30.lo.2o2o and not on 31.o3.2021 as claimed by the Applicant in its Application" It was contended that the date of NPA classification does not necessarily mean the date of default. iii. The Respondents submits that this Application is barred by section 10 A of the code, as the date of default is 30. ro,2o2o as per the records of financial creditor and the date of NpA shall Sr\ Z Sa

NCLT CUTTACK BENCH cP(lB) No.I3/CBl202a fall after 90 days, then it falls on January,2021, which would alsc_r be barred by Section 10A" iv" The Applicant had intentionally classified the account of the Corporate Debtor as NPA on 3LO3"2O2| after expiry of suspension period, thereafter used the same as the date of default without any basis in its Application, which is evident frorn the Loan Recall Notice annexed vide Annexure 11 at page No"2s0 of the application where the date of default is seen as 30" rCI.2ozo. v" The Respondent submits that. the Applicant had also concealed the fact that the Respondent had approached the Hon'ble High Court of Odisha in WP(C) No" 35696 of 2O2tr, and vide order dated 24^ll.2o2r, the Hon'ble High court has posted the matter to another date to await the outcorne of the amicable resolution. vi. Thereafter, the Respondent had made a proposatr of ors vide letter dated 06.06.2023 for an amount of Rs. 10 crores, which was accepted by the Applicant vide letter dated 72.46"2023. The cheque issued by the Applicant for settlement of the ors amount got dishonoured, and before the Respondent could replace the cheque, the Applicant revoked the ors vide letter dated 08.01.2024 and also issued a sale notice for sale of the property on 09.01 .2024, which was unsuccessfur in execution. vii" The Respondent submits that it has the means and intention to make the payment of the outstanding dues, and it is a solvent company. As the Respondent was undergoing temporary stress during the COVID- 1g pandemic, the Respondent was unable to pay, which is also admitted by the Applicant" To substantiate the same, the respondent relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme court in vidharba rnd.ustries Power Limited Ys. Axis Bank Limited (2022) g scc r\ bd gdZ

NCLT CUTTACK BENCH cP(lB) No.1-3/CB/2024 viii" The affidavit of Mr" purna chandra Majhi verifying the contents of the present Application is wrong as the address of Mr^ Majhi is stated to be at Bhubaneswar, but notarizingthe affidavit in cuttack is entirely null and void. Hence, the present Application is liable to be dismissed as it is defective and incomplete. ix" There exist defects in the Application, such as the application pertains to Financial Debt, but the form contains contents of Form-S, which is for operational Debt. Besides, necessary information, such as the declaration of service of the Application to IBBI and the corporate Debtor, is missing" x" The default amount claimed in the application, Rs" tr8,50,93, x77.221- as on o1.o2.2024, is not substantiated by any computation. ln the demand notice under section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act,2002, the Applicant has stated the claim amount to be Rs. 12,16,B5,2lll-as on 30"10.2020, including principal amount of Rs. 7L,84,71,7o31- and interest amount of Rs. 32,14,1081-. The Applicant has inflated the claim amount mentioned in the notice by Rs. 6 Crores without any justification, calculation, or reasoning. xi. The Applicant has not attached the working of the computation of the amount of debt and the date of default in tabular form as it is mandated under part IV of Form- 1" 4" The rebuttal made by the Applicants in its rejoinder to reply are summarised hereunder: i. The Applicant submits that the DGM grade personnel of the Financial Creditor are eligible to approve and sign the matters before any Adjudicating Authority as per the Financial Creditor's approved delegation of power, attached with the Application. Hence, Purna chandra Majhi, who is now present DGM in the Applicant Bank's Retail Recovery Department, and accordingly is authorized to sign the present Application" gd 3a -=z

NCLT CUTTACK BENCH CP(tB) No^ t3lCB/2a24 ii" Respondent has initially defaulted in March 2o2a and continued defaulting in repayments and was given ample opportunities to regularize the account. Hence, after providing multiple opportunities, the account of the corporate Debtor was declared as NPA on 31.o3.2o21, and after which it recalled the loan on 05.05.2021 and issued notice under SARFAESI Act,2002 on 24 .OS "2021. iii. In accordance with the interim order passed by the Hon,ble orissa High court in wP(c) No"35696 l2o2l, the Financial creditor and the corporate Debtor entered into negotiations and pursuant to which the orS proposal of the corporate Debtor was accepted by the Financial creditor" However, the corporate Debtor failed to adhere to the terms of the ors and hence the same was revoked" iv" In regard to the orS proposal and dishonor of cheque, the Applicant submitted that orS proposal submitted by Respondent on 23"02.2023 is itself an acknowredgement of Debt and the default also occurred on the aforesaid date. To substantiate this, the Applicant has relied upon the Judgment of Hon,ble Apex court rn Dena Bo.nk vs. c, shiuaKumq.r Red.dg & qnother (2O21) rO SCC s?O. v. As per the normal prevailing practice, since the NCLT, cuttack Bench functions at cuttack and the conducting counsel for the Applicant also resides and functions his office at cuttack for which the Applicant has sworn the affidavit at cuttack. vi. In regard to the inadvertently mentioning of, ,operational Creditor" instead of "Financial Creditor,, and the copy of the Application served r-lpon the corporate Debtor through mail and submission to IBBI was also mad e on 22.o3.2024. In this regard, a memo was also filed before the registry of this Tribunal. The Applicant had also sent the notice through email as well as through speed Post to Respondent as per order dated 06.os.2024 g d=,? 9a

NCI-T CUTTACK BENCH CP(lB) No.I3/CBl2a24 which was received by Corporate Debtor and service affidavit was also filed in this regard before the Registry" vii. About the inflated amount claimed in the Application, the Applicant submitted that the Application was filed before this Tribunal on 07"03.2024, and by caiculating the interest and expenses up to 07"o2.2o24, t]ne Applicant has filed the present application. 5" In the order dated 08.08"2024 of this Tribunal, the Respondent was directed to file an Additional Affidavit to controvert the additional facts that have been brought out by the Applicant in its rejoinder filed. The submissions of the Additionat Affidavit filed by the Respondent are: i" The alleged authorisation document upon which this Application is filed is a one-page document annexed at page" 16 of the Appiication which does not disclose the following vital aspects: (i) the name or nature of the document; (ii) the person to whom authorization is sought to be given to do the actions mentioned therein or (iii) the person or body who is delegating that authority and under what capacity I authority this delegation is sought to be done. ii" From a perusal of the said page" 16 of the Application, it is clear that it is a truncated page out of a document which may be titled "Delegation of Powers- May, 2023' which does not disclose the name of the person/ body delegating power, or the name of the person to whom the authority is being delegated or even the power basis which such delegation is sought to be done" This document is therefore totally unauthentic and cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be termed as a valid authority in favour of the person signing the Application. iii. As per the notification dated 22.02.2019 of the central Government, only a person duly autkrcrtzed by the Board of Directors of a company can file an application on behalf of a gd Ci - =,- .-)al -\

},:iJ,TJfliH,lHX Financial creditor under section T of the code. The said notification is reproduced hereunder; MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AF'F'AIRS NOTIFICATION Neu-t Delhi, the 27th February, 2019 s.o. 1091(E).-In exercise of the potDers conferred. by sub-sectioru(l) of section T of the Insoluertcg and. Bankruptcy pl code, 2a16 of 2016), the certral Gouernment herebg notifies follotuirug persons who mag fire an application Jor initiating corporate insoluency resolution pracess against a. corporate debtor before the Adjudicating Authority, onbehalf of the financial creditor: - (i) a guardian; (ii) an executor or administrator of an. estate of a financial creditor, ' (iii) a trustee (including a debenture trustee), . and. (u) a person duly authorised bu the Board of Directors of a Compang. [F. No" 30/ 25/ 20 1 B-InsoluencA Section] GYANESHWAR KUMAR SlIr/GH, Jt, Secg", iv. The Applicant had not rectified the said defect in pursuance of the order dated 08.0g.2024 of this Tribunal to furnish Pg-16 of the Application in proper format" But instead of furnishing, he has taken the plea that the same does not form part of the order dated o8.o8,2o24. So, it is evident that the Applicant is aware of the said fundamental defect in its Application, which goes to the root of the matter. Hence, it is liable to be dismissed as valid authorisation has not been provided" v. The rejoinder filed by the Appricant was signed by one Mr. sunit Kumar Pandey, who at para 3 of the rejoinder mentioned that he is authorised by the Financial creditor, but has failed to disclose Sa= Sa

NCLT CUTTACK BENCI-{ cP(lB) No.13lcBl2o24 the authortzation on the basis of which he had sworn in to file the said Rejoinder Affidavit" vi. To escape the rigours of section 10 A of the code, the Applicant had made a false statement under oath before this Tribunal, whereas the Applicant had categorically admitted in Para 8 of the Rejoinder that the date of default was subsisting lrom March 2O2O. The date of default claimed in the Form I is also wrong, and the Bank also knows it to be wrong. Therefore, as per settled law, the date of default is not necessarily the date of NPA, but the date when the debt has become due and payable but has not been paid" Thus, on this ground alone, the present Application is liable to be dismissed i.n limine. 6. We have heard the Learned Counsels for both Parties and have perused the documents available on record. It is noted that the Financiai Creditor had sanctioned a loan amount of Rs. 15 crores on 09. 12"2a14, which was renewed and brought down to Rs" 12 crores on 31.lo,2org on the request of the Corporate Debtor. The date of default as mentioned in part trv of the Application is 31.o3.2a21, and the default amount is Rs. 18,50,93,177.22/- calculated as on 01 .o2.2024. The NeSL certificate filed by the Applicant also shows the date of default as 31 .o3.2o2r. 7. It is observed that on 06"05.2021, the Financial creditor had sent a Loan Recall notice to the Corporate Debtor demanding Rs 12,16,85,211l-with further interest from 02.o4"2021, and the Financial Creditor had also initiated a Demand Notice under the SARFAtrSI Act, 2oo2 on 24.o5.2o2t. From the perusal of the Demand Notice, it is evident that the Corporate Debtor had three properties, which are situated in Berhampur, Bhubaneswar, and Titlagarh, three different places of Odisha. One of the properties situated in Bhubaneswar was auctioned and sold to one Sasmita Acharya by issuing a sale certificate on 06"04.2022 for Rs. 54,83,300/- in full by handing over the delivery and possession of the scheduled property. Another two properties situated in Berhampur and Titlagarh are in possession of the Financial gd =Z 3a

NCLT CUTTACK BENCH CP(lB) No,13lCBl2024 Creditor pursuant to a Possession Notice dated 12.08.2024 and an order dated 27.1O.2022 passed by the District Magistrate under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act respectively" on 18.12"2022 and 09.02.2023, the Financial Creditor made a newspaper publication f,or auctioning the property rnentioned above" However, it failed due to the unavailabiiity of any interested buyer. 8. It is observed from the Annexure 9 enclosed in the application that the Corporate Debtor had availed a credit facility loan of Rs.i5 Lakhs rn 2a14 and later on it was brought down to the tune of Rs"12 Crore tn 2A 19" On perusal of the ledger account of the Corporate Debtor maintained by the Financiai Creditor from 3i.03.202I to 01"03.2024, it is evident that there is an existence of debt and the default has occurred" 9. The Corporate Debtor has contended that the date of defauit provided in the Application is not appropriate as the default amount mentioned by the Applicant is without any computation" The Corporate Debtor had also pointed out that in Annexure II of the Loan Recall Notice dated a6"o5.2o27 and Demand Notice dated 24.os"2o21 of the SARFAESI Act issued by the Financial Creditor, the due date has been mentioned as 30.10.2020 which is annexed at page No.252 and 265 respectively, which is covered under section 10A of the Code, whereas it is seen that the Applicant has mentioned 31"o3.2o21 as the date of default to get out of the rigours of section 10A of the Code. 10. Now we need to see whether the date of default falls under Section i0A of the Code or not. It is pertinent to note that the due date mentioned in the Loan Recall Notice and Demand Notice is 30" lo.2o2o, i.e., the due date of the Principal and Interest amount, which has become due and payable but not paid" Furthermore, in the written submissions, the Financial creditor had relied upon CRILC (Central Repository of Information on Large credits) report from which it is evident that on various occasions the Corporate Debtor by paying the default amount, moved out of default and then again moved into default 3d 6d -?

NCLT CUTTACK BENCH cP(lB) No.1.3/CBl2o24 and the bare reading of the CRILC report shows that the last date on which the corporate Debtor went into default is 0 r .o4.2o2r. 11. It is a trite law that the first proulso to section iOA of IBC becomes applicable only when the default has occurred between 25"03.2020 and 24.03.2021 (both in.clusiue)" In the present case, the Loan Recall Notice dated o6.o1.2o2L and Demand Notice dated 24^o5.2027 even though mention the due date of payment of principal and interest as on 30.1A.2O2O, but it is pertinent to mention here that when we examine the ledger account statement of the Corporate Debtor maintained by the Financial Creditor, it is noted that the transactions reflected in the statement pertains to the time period between o1.o4.2a20 and 31"03.2021 and upon reviewing the said statement, it is evident that the Respondent made payments after the dates mentioned in the said notices dated 06.05.2021 ctf Loan recall Notice and Demand Notice dated 24.os"2o21 under SARFAESI Act, 2oo2. continuing up to 31 .o3"2a21. The Respondent, after 31"03.202j., had not made any payment tiIl ol.os.2o24, and the debt amount, by accruing interest, came up to Rs. 18,50, tZT.22l-, which gets rellected in the ledger account for the period from 31.03.2021 to ol.og.2o24" Hence, upon perusal of the ledger account, it can be clearly seen that the default was not committed in the time period covered under section 10A of the Code" L2. This Tribunal is inclined to place reliance upon the judgment of Hon'ble NCLAT in Nufuture Digital India Ltd. vs. Axis Tr:rtstee seruices Ltd, company Appeal (AT)(Ins) No,444 of 2o2s, wherein it was held that Section 1OA has no application when an action is initiated for default which occurred subsequent to the period prescribed under Section 10A. The relevant excerpt of the judgment is reproduced herein for reference: 20. Present ls a case where date of d"efault ls claimed as 31"03.2O21 in Part IV of the application and. the apptication is filed. including the default amount as per the Debenture Tntst Deed., _9r- Sd =Z 1.2

NCLT CUTTACK BENCH CP(lB) No. t3lCBl20z4 schedule v, the default from sj.0s.2021 onward.s. we haue noticed Para 5 of Reply to tLte application tplrcre it was clearly stated that uthile the total cl.aim uould-be higher, the present Petition is filed oruly witlt respect to the default committed after the 10A period was ouer i.e. for the defaurt on 3 j.st. March 2021 and. thereafter. Wha.t is prohibited by Section 10A is tLtat na application sha.ll euer be filed.for the default which occurred-during the pertod of section 10A i.e" from 2sth MarcLt, 2020 ta 25th March, 202j. Section 10A has no application when an action is initiated for default which occurred subsequent to 1oA period.. sectiort Z application as well as Replg filed to I"A" .l[o" s4/ 2022 clearlg indicate that Section 7 application wttichwas filed. by the Firuancial Creditor was confined to the default committed bg tLte Appeuant on 31.03.2021 and thereafter. In Para 7 of the Repty total calculations haue been mentiorued for arriuing at the d.efautt amount of Rs"210,46,66,250/-. The defaulted amount included. for the calculation are the defaulted amount beginning from 31"05"2021 tilt end of December, 2023" No defaulted amount includ.ed. in the compang Appeal (AT) Insoluerucy 1[o. 444 of 2023 section T application is for the period couered" by section 10A, hence, there is no occasion to hold that Section 7 apptication is barred. bg Section 10A^ 13" trn regard to the point of limitation it is noted that the Corporate Debtor had approached the Financial Creditor for OTS settlement on 23.o2.2o23 after the order passed by the Hon'ble High court of orissa in wP(c) No.35696 of 2021 vide order dated 24.tt.2o2L such an ors proposal was also accepted by the Financial Creditor, but it was revoked on 0B'01.2024 as the Corporate Debtor could not meet the schedule of payment prescribed by it in its OTS proposal. It is also observed that the said writ Petition has already been disposed of vide order dated 03.O2'2025 by observing that Writ Petition has become infructuous as gA Sd -,2

NCLT CUTTACK BENCH cP(lB) No.1.31C812024 e-auction date has already been over" For ready reference, the order has been reproduced herein below: IN TI{E HIGH COURT OF OR/SSA AT CUITACK W"P.(C) No" ss696 of 2021 M/ s Fortune Spirit Limited .... Petitioner Mr. Sudipta Kumar Sarangi, Aduocate -UETSUS IDBI Bank Limited and others .... Opp. Parties Mr. P"V. Balakrishna, Aduocate CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA ORDE]? . 03.02.2025 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode" 2" Peti.tioner in this turit petition seeks to assail the sale n.otice dated 24th october, 2021 fi*ing the date of e-auction to 24th Nouember,2021. 3. TLtis Court, uide order dated 24th Nouernber, 2027, directed. the Petitioner to present himself before the competent authoritg of the Bank uith a concrete proposal to upgrade the Account to a standard Account" 4" It is submitted by Mr. Balakrishna, learned counsel for the Opposite Parties-Bank that Petitioners did ruot approach the Bank utithiru the time stipulated, i.e., withiru three tuorking days from the date of the order. 5. Since the e-auction date has already passed, the writ petition has become infructuous. 6. Accordinglg, the utrit petition is disposed of as infruchtous. L4. Therelbre, we are of the considered view that as the default has occurred on 31 .o3.2021 and the subsequent acknowledgement made by the Corporate Debtor through OTS extends the limitation period. It is seen that the Applicant had filed this application on 07 "O3.2024 wltif5 is well within the period of limitation. Hence, the period of limitation stands satisfied, g4- 5a 1.4

NCLT CUTTACK BENCH cP(lB) No" t3/CB/2024 15. It is thus made amply clear that all the conditions to admit a Section 7 application are satisfied in the present case for the fact that there exists a 'debt'and 'default' in payment of debt by Corporate Debtor, we have not expressed any opinion on the other arguments raised by both the Parties. L6. In view of the aforesaid observations, we hereby ADMIT the petition and pass the following Orders: - i. The Petition bearing CP (IB) No. L3lCBl2O24 filed by IDBI Bank Ltd. under SectionT of the Code read with rule 4(1) of the insolvency & Bankruptcy (Petition to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 201.6 for initiating CIRP against Fortune Spirits Limited, the Corporate Debtor, is ADMITTED" ii" The moratorium under section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is declared for prohibiting all of the following in terms of section 14(1) of the Code a) the institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the corporate debtor including execution of any judgment, decree, or order in any court of law, tribunal, arbitration panel, or other authority; b) transferring, encumbering, alienating, or disposing of by the corporate debtor any of its assets or any legal right or beneficial interest therein; c) any action to foreclose, recover or enforce any security interest created by the corporate debtor in respect of its property including any action under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Bnforcement of Security Interest Act, 2OO2; d) the recovery of any property by an owner or lessor where such property is occupied by or in the possession of the corporate debtor. 3c 8a =-

NCLT CUTTACK BENCH CP(lB) No,13/CB/202a 111. The order of moratorium shall have effect from the date of this order till the completion of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process until this Adjudicating Authority approves the Resolution Pian under sub-section (1) of section 31 or passes an order for liquidation of Corporate Debtor under section 33 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, as the case may be" iv. As proposed by the Financial Creditor, MR. SAMBHULAT AGARWAL, having Registration No" IBBI/IPA- OOI/IP- POO387/ 2OL7 -1 8/ 10698. and Email Id: sambhuandassociates@gmail. com residence at At- Bazar Kolkata Building, 2nd. Floor, Nayapara, Sambalpur - 768001 Odishan is hereby appointed as Interim Resolution ProfessionaX (IRP) of the Corporate Debtor to carry out the functions as per the Code, subject to his possessing a valid Authorisation for Assignment (AFA) in terms of 7A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (lnsolvency Professional) Regulations, 2016. V" The IRP so appointed shall make a public announcement of initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution process (CIRP) and call for submission of claims under Section 1S as required by Section 13(1) (b) of the Code. vi" The supply of essential goods or services to the corporate debtor, if continuing, shall not be terminated or suspended, or interrupted during the moratorium period. The corporate debtor is to provide effective assistance to the iRP as and when he takes charge of the assets and management of the corporate debtor. vll" The IRP shall perform all his functions as contemplated, inter alia, by sections 17, 78, 20 &; 2l of the Code. It is further made clear that all personnel connected with Corporate Debtor, its Promoter or any other person gd 3d

NCLT CUTTACK BENCH cP(lB) Na.13/CBl2o24 associated with management of the Corporate Debtor are under legal obligation under section lg of the Code extending every assistance and co-operation to the Interim Resolution Professional. Where any personnel of the Corporate Debtor, its Promoter or any other person required to assist or cooperate with IRP, do not assist or cooperate, the IRP is at liberty to make an appropriate application to this Adjudicating Authority with a prayer for passing an appropriate order. viii. The iRP shall be under a dtlty to protect and preserve the value of the property of the 'Corporate Debtor'and manage the operations of the Corporate Debtor as a going concern as a part of the obligation imposed by section 2A of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2Arc. ix" The IRP/RP shall submit to this Adjudicating Authority periodical reports concerning the progress of the CIRp in respect of the Corporate Debtor" x. The Financial Creditor shall deposit a. sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- within two weeks from the date of receipt of this order for the purpose of smooth conduct of the corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) and IRp to file proof of receipt of such amount to this Adjudicating Authority along with the First Progress Report. Subsequently, IRp may raise further demands for Interim funds, which shall be provided as per Rules. xi. In terms of section 7(7)(a) of the Code, the Registry is hereby directed to communicate a copy of this order to the Financial Creditor, Corporate Debtor and to the Interim Resolution Professional and the concerned Registrar of Companies, within seven (7) working days and upload the same on the website immediately after pronouncement of the order. 3.1 6a -7 t7

NCLT CUTTACK BENCH CP(lB) No. B/aB/2024 xii, The IRP shall also serve a copy of this order to the various departments, such as income Tax, GST, State Trade Tax, and Provident Fund, etc" who are likely to have their claim against the corporate Debtor as well as to the trade unions/employee associations so that they are informed of the initiation of CIRP against the Corporate Debtor timely" xiii. The commencement of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process shall be effective from the date of this order" L7. The Resolution Professional shall submit his periodic reports before this Adjudicating Authority as per the rules. 18. Hence, cP(lB) No. tslcBl2o24 ts ALLOWED and accordingly Corporate Debtor ADMITTED into CIRP. L9. A certified copy of this order may be issued, if applied for, upon compliance with all requisite formalities. 20. The file will be consigned to the records"

3d Sa slit(rfenr LAL MEENA DEEP CMNEma;iil, (MEMBER TECHNTCAL) (MEMBER JUDICIALI