In the matter of Vihaan Exims Company Pvt. Ltd.

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI BENCH (COURT– II) Item No. 205 IB-107/ND/2023 IN THE MATTER OF: Vihaan Exims Company Pvt. Ltd. … Applicant/Petitioner Versus Yes Bank Ltd. Ors. … Respondent Under Section: 10 of IBC, 2016 Order delivered on 23.10.2024 CORAM: SH. ASHOK KUMAR BHARDWAJ SH. SUBRATA KUMAR DASH HON’BLE MEMBER (J) HON’BLE MEMBER (T) PRESENT: For the Applicant : Adv. Bharti Nawlani along with CA Rakesh Jindal For the Respondent : Adv. Siddharth Jain, Adv. Shubham Saigal for R1

Hearing Through: VC and Physical (Hybrid) Mode ORDER The present petition has been preferred under Section 10 of IBC, 2016, praying therein:

2. The amount of debt and default has been mentioned in Part-III of the application which reads thus:

Satya Prakash/Atul Raj

Satya Prakash/Atul Raj

Satya Prakash/Atul Raj

Satya Prakash/Atul Raj

Satya Prakash/Atul Raj

3. The balance sheet indicating the financial status of the Petitioner Company as on 31.12.2022 has been placed on record as Annexure- IV to the application. The consent of the Resolution Professional (Form-2) under sub-rule (1) of Rule 9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 is available on record as Annexure- IIIA to the application. The IP whose name has been proposed as IRP has made a declaration that no disciplinary proceedings are pending against him. Relevant excerpt of the Form-2 reads thus:

4. The Board Resolution dated 29.11.2022 regarding filing of the present petition has been placed on record as Annexure- IIIB to the present petition. The Resolution reads thus:

5. The Shareholders of the Petitioner Company in EGM also passed a special resolution regarding initiation of the process under Section 10 of IBC,

Satya Prakash/Atul Raj

2016. The special resolution dated 25.11.2022 placed as Annexure- VIIB to the petition reads thus:

6. Our attention could be drawn to the affidavit dated 06.04.2024 filed on behalf of the Petitioner uploaded on DMS on 09.04.2024. In para 2 of the affidavit, the deponent namely Mr. Jatin Jain, authorized signatory, deposed that the present application is not collusive and has not been filed to overreach any judicial proceedings for debt recovery or otherwise. Para 2 of the affidavit reads thus:

7. On service of notice, one of the Creditor viz. J. C. Flowers, was represented before us. Today, Mr. Jatin Jain, Ld. Counsel appearing for the J.C. Flowers Services, submitted that Yes Bank could assign the amount of debt to his client J.C. Flowers Assets Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. and further submitted that the Creditor has no objection to admission of the petition and commencement of CIRP qua the Company.

Satya Prakash/Atul Raj

8. No infirmity or deficiency is pointed out in the application by the Ld. Counsel appearing for the Creditor. 9. At this stage, Ld. Counsel appearing for the Creditor (J.C. Flowers Services) submitted that the amount of debt due to the Yes Bank Ltd/assignee indicated in the application is less while the actual amount payable is more. It is clarified that we have not determined the amount of debt and have admitted the application because the amount of default is more than Rs. 1 crore. It would be open to the Creditors to stake their respective claims before the IRP and the IRP would examine/verify the same without being influenced by averments made in the application.

10. In view of the aforementioned, the application deserves to be admitted. Order accordingly. In the wake, moratorium provided under Section 14 of IBC, 2016 is declared qua the CD and as a necessary consequence thereof the following prohibitions are imposed, which must be followed by all and sundry: (a) The institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the Respondent 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 Respondent 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 Respondent in respect of its property including any action under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002; (d) The recovery of any property by an owner or lessor, where such property is occupied by or in the possession of the Respondent.

Satya Prakash/Atul Raj

11. As proposed by the Petitioner Mr. Umesh Gupta, having Registration IBBI/IPA-001/IP-P00848/2017-2018/11431 is appointed as IRP. It is further ordered that: “Mr. Umesh Gupta shall take charge of the CIRP of the Corporate Debtor with immediate effect and would take steps as mandated under the IBC specifically under Section 15, 17, 18, 20 and 21 of IBC, 2016 read with extend provisions of IBBI (Insolvency Resolution of Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016.”

12. The Petitioner is directed to deposit Rs. 2,00,000/- only with the IRP to meet the immediate expenses. The amount, however, will be subject to adjustment by the Committee of Creditors as accounted for by Interim Resolution Professional and shall be paid back to the Financial Creditor. 13. A copy of this Order shall immediately be communicated by the Registry/Court Officer of this Tribunal to the Petitioner /Financial Creditor, the Respondent/Corporate Debtor and the IRP mentioned above.

14. In addition, a copy of this Order shall also be forwarded by the Registry/Court Officer of this Tribunal to the IBBI for their records.

Sd/- Sd/- (SUBRATA KUMAR DASH) (ASHOK KUMAR BHARDWAJ) MEMBER (T) MEMBER (J)

Satya Prakash/Atul Raj