Mm Ramachandran vs South Indian Bank Ltd & Ors

M M Ramachandran ...Appellant

Vs

South Indian Bank Ltd. & Ors. ....Respondent

Present:

For Appellant: Present but appearance not marked.

For Respondents: Mr. Krishnendu Dutta, Mr. Parag Maini, Mr. Abhimanyu Chopra, Mr. Amit Srivastava and Ms. Mehak Khurana, Advocates for R-1.

ORDER

22.01.2020: Pursuant to application under Section 7 filed by 'South Indian

Bank Ltd.' (Financial Creditor) by impugned order dated 19th November, 2019,

the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Kochi Bench,

Kochi initiated Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against M/s Atlas Gold

Townships (India) Pvt. Ltd.' (Corporate Debtor). The Appellant/ Promoter has

challenged the same on two grounds:-

(a) The Application under Section 7 is barred by limitation.

(b) There is no record of default enclosed in terms of Section 7(3)(b).

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1509 of 2019 -2-

2. It was submitted by learned counsel for the Appellant that the account of

Corporate Debtor was declared Non Preforming Asset (NPA) on 31st December,

2015 and the application under Section 7 was filed on 10th April, 2019 i.e. much

beyond the period of three years.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent Bank relied on an

email received on 2nd May, 2016 followed by a letter received on 30th May, 2016

to support that the Appellant has acknowledged the dues as on 30th May, 2016

and therefore the Bank is entitled to take advantage of Section 18 of the

Limitation Act, 1963.

4. Email dated 2nd May, 2016, which was also sent by the Appellant and

undated letter received by the Bank on 30th May, 2016 shows that the Appellant

acknowledged the dues and intimated that he has taken Rs.220 Crores and the

outstanding amount subsequently rose to Rs.250 Crores with interest. In the

end of it, it was informed that the Appellant is determined to pay all the amounts

granted by the Bank and requested not to give any adverse publicity that may

result in reduction in the value of the properties. Email dated 2nd May, 2016 is

extracted below:-

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1509 of 2019 -3-

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1509 of 2019 -4-

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1509 of 2019 -5-

5. The Appellant denied the said email and letter on the ground that it is

forged. An additional affidavit has been filed by the Bank which also produced

the cover by which the letter, which is typed out copy of email dated 2nd May,

2016, was despatched by Mr. M M Ramachandran under his signatures from

Dubai on 16th May, 2016 and received by the Bank on 25th May, 2016. The

Original letter is also produced before us, therefore, we hold that the email dated

2nd May, 2016 is genuine. The Appellant has taken wrong plea that it is forged.

6. When asked, learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the Appellant

was in jail in Dubai for having defaulted to pay creditors there and was under

travel restrictions. It shows that he is a habitual defaulter. However, it is not

clear how he has sworn affidavit in India.

7. From the record we also find that Bank has enough records to support

that there is a default and therefore, the Adjudicating Authority rightly admitted

the application under Section 7. In absence of any merit, the appeal is

dismissed. No costs.

[Justice S. J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson

[Justice Bansi Lal Bhat] Member (Judicial)

[Justice Anant Bijay Singh] Member (Judicial) am/gc Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1509 of 2019