Mannoj Kumar Jain vs State Bank Of India & Anr

IN THE MATTER OF: Manoj Kumar Jain ...Appellant Versus State Bank of India & Anr. ...Respondents

Present:

For Appellant: Mr. Abhijeet Sinha, Mr. Kumar Anurag Singh, Mr. Ashish Choudhary, Mr. Zain A Khan, Advocates

For Respondent: Mr. PBA Srinivasan, Mr. Aravind, Ms. Srishti Bansal, Advocates Mr. Kushal Bansal, Ms. Nidhi Yadav, Advocates for R-2 Ms. Indrani Mukherjee, Advocate for IDBI Bank

ORDER

18.04.2023: Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant.

This appeal has been filed against the order dated 18.07.2022 by which

order on the application filed by the State Bank of India (SBI) u/s 7 the

Adjudicating Authority has admitted the Section 7 application. When the appeal

was heard, this Tribunal passed the following order on 05.08.2022:-

"Mr. Abhijeet Sinha, learned Counsel for the

Appellant submits that financial assistance was

taken by the Appellant from the consortium of

Bank in which the Central Bank of India is the

lead bank. It is submitted that all other banks of Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 932 of 2022 1 the consortium entered in O.T.S. with the

Appellant and it is only the State Bank of India

which has not accepted the OTS offered by the

Appellant. It is also submitted that the Appellant

is taking steps to settle the dues of SBI and shall

make one more effort. It is submitted that if

Committee of Creditors is constituted, in

pursuance of the impugned order, settlement

with some of the Banks shall be in jeopardy.

Let notices be issued on Respondents by Speed

Post. Requisites along with process fee, if not

filed, be filed by within three days. If the

Appellant provides the e-mail address of

Respondents, let notices be also issued through

e-mail. Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No.

932 of 2022 Page 2 of 2 Reply Affidavit be filed

within two weeks and Rejoinder, if any, be filed

two weeks thereafter.

List the matter on 6th September, 2022.

In the meantime, IRP, in pursuance of the

impugned order, shall ensure that the Corporate

Debtor continues as going concern. However, till

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 932 of 2022 2 the next date of hearing, IRP shall not constitute

CoC".

2. An IA has been filed being an IA No. 1566/2023 by which the 'One Time

Settlement' (OTS) order issued by SBI dated 12.04.2023 has been brought on

record where the Bank has accepted the OTS offer of Rs. 81 crore given by the

Appellant.

3. Learned Counsel for the Bank submits that it does not dispute that the

OTS has been accepted, however, he submits that in the event the default is

committed by the Appellant in payment, Bank should be given the liberty to

make an application for reviving the CIRP proceedings.

4. Learned Counsel for the IDBI Bank submits that IDBI bank, dues has not

been yet settled.

5. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that Appellant shall take steps

with the IDBI Bank for settlement of the dues failing which it shall be open for

the IDBI Bank to take its own proceedings in accordance with law.

6. Taking into consideration of the aforesaid facts including the OTS order

issued by the SBI, the order dated 18.07.2022 is set aside. The CIRP proceedings

are closed with the liberty to the Bank to make an application for revival if Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 932 of 2022 3 occasion so arises. With regard to fees of the IRP, Learned Counsel for the

Appellant submits the Appellant shall sit with the IRP and shall pay the relevant

dues of the IRP.

With these observations we close this Appeal.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Mr. Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)

ss/nn

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 932 of 2022 4