Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2025) 07 NCLT CK 1528

Canara Bank Limited vs M/s. SLS Power Limited

National Company Law Tribunal, Amaravati Bench · Decided on 22 July 2025

HON’BLE JUDGES
Umesh Kumar Shukla, Member (Technical) · Kishore Vemulapalli, Member (Judicial)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
CP (IB)/18/7/AMR/2025

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

85 paragraphs · 5,269 words

The present Application has been filed vide Diary No.760 dated 25.04.2025 by Canara Bank Limited, ARM Branch, having its address at #54-15-4B, Ground Floor, Lakshmi Avenue, Srinivasa Nagar, Bank Colony, Vijayawada-520008, Andhra Pradesh (Financial Creditor) represented by its Authorized Representative, Mr. Nagaraj C. Meeshi, under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, (IBC) read with Rule 4 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 (IB Rules) seeking initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against SLS Power Limited (Corporate Debtor) for having defaulted in payment of outstanding dues of Rs.62,55,18,592.72/- including interest computed up to 31.03.2025.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:

2.

Brief facts of the case, as submitted by the Counsel of the Financial Creditor, are as under:

(i)

The Corporate Debtor is a Company incorporated on 14.12.1998 under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 bearing CIN: U40109AP1998PLC030682. As per the Master Data annexed with the Application, the Authorised Share Capital of the Corporate Debtor is Rs.9,00,00,000/- and the Paid-up Share Capital is Rs.8,97,19,620/-. The registered office of the Corporate Debtor is situated at Sy. No.202/A2, Ashok Nagar, Navalok Gardens, Nellore, Andhra Pradesh-524002.

(ii)

The Corporate Debtor approached the Financial Creditor for the credit facilities. The Financial Creditor sanctioned credit facilities by virtue of Letter of Sanction dated 30.11.2015 aggregating to Rs.23.25 crore (Rs.9.60 crore towards working capital facilities, Rs.5.00 crore towards non-fund based credit limits and Rs.8.65 crore towards term loan) to the Corporate Debtor by taking over the existing term loan and working capital limits from Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency Limited (IREDA) and the then Andhra Bank (now merged and known as Union Bank) at the rate of interest of BR+3.25 + 0.25 tenor premium.

(iii)

Towards the aforementioned sanction, the Corporate Debtor executed the following documents:

a. General Agreement dated 20.01.2016.

b. Letter dated 20.01.2016 of loan facility granted.

c. Demand Promissory Note dated 20.01.2016.

d. Composite Hypothecation Agreement dated 19.08.2016.

e. Charge and Hypothecation of Book Debts Agreement dated 20.01.2016.

f. Omnibus Counter Guarantee dated 20.01.2016.

g. Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds by virtue of Document Numbers 970/2016, 1914/2016, 2005/2016.

h. Acknowledgement of Debt dated 21.04.2016.

(iv)

After sanction of the credit facilities, the loan account was classified as Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on 02.07.2018 and a demand notice under section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) was issued on 20.07.2018.

(v)

The Financial Creditor filed Original Application numbered as 659/2019 before the Hon'ble Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) at Visakhapatnam, which is currently pending. Meanwhile, the Corporate Debtor filed Securitization Application SA No. 382/2018 before the Hon’ble DRT, which was allowed in favour of the Corporate Debtor.

(vi)

All securities mentioned in preceding paragraphs and annexed with the Application continue to be valid and in force.

(vii)

The loan account was classified as NPA on 02.07.2018, after that the Corporate Debtor submitted One-Time Settlement (OTS) letters dated 02.06.2020, 06.01.2023, 23.05.2023, 23.02.2024 to the Financial Creditor, which would amount to acknowledgement of the debt thereby extending the limitation period. Thus, the present case is well within the limitation.

(viii)

The total outstanding liability of the Corporate Debtor is Rs.62,55,18,592.72/- as of 31.03.2025, inclusive of the interest. Despite acknowledgement of its dues, the Corporate Debtor has failed to discharge its dues towards the Financial Creditor.

(ix)

The account-wise amount claimed to be in default along with the rate of interest computed up to 31.03.2025 is Rs.62.55 crore as below:

Account No.PrincipalInterestTotal
3462140000059412,28,30,494.3028,56,25,090.340,84,55,584.58
S3SOSLB 1928402905,04,48,275.0011,94,48,61116,98,96,886.06
S3SOSL51928400161,84,00,000.002,87,66, 122.084,71,66,122.08
19,16,78,769.3043,38,39,823.462,55,18,592.72
(x)

As per Part-IV of Form 1 of the Application, the total amount of debt granted, dates of disbursement, the amount claimed to be in default and the date on which the default occurred are given hereunder:

PART – IV PARTICULARS OF FINANCIAL DEBT

1.TOTAL AMOUNT OF DEBT GRANTED DATES OF DISBURSEMENTRs. 23,25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Three Crores Twenty Five Lakhs Only) 26/02/2016 & 19/08/2016. The Working Capital was disbursed as and when required. The entire limit of 14.60 Crores sanctioned has been utilised by the Corporate Debtor.
2.AMOUNT CLAIMED TO BE IN DEFAULT AND THE DATE ON WHICH THE DEFAULT OCCURREDRs.62,55,18,592.72/- (Rupees Sixty Two Crores Fifty Five Lakhs Eighteen Thousand Five Hundred and Ninety Two and Seventy Two Paise Only) inclusive of the interest computed up to 31/03/2025 02/07/2018 -The Loan Account was classified as NPA Period from 15/03/2020 to 28/02/2022 is excluded from computation of limitation in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Suo Motu Writ No. 3/2020. The Corporate Debtor issued OTS Letters dated 02/06/2020, 06/01/2023, 23/05/2023, 23/02/2024. Thus, the present case is well within the prescribed period of limitation.

REPLY OF THE CORPORATE DEBTOR:

3.

The Counsel of the Corporate Debtor stated that the Corporate Debtor has filed its Counter vide Diary No.1413 dated 18.07.2025, denying the allegations and averments made in the Application filed by the Financial Creditor. He further stated that:

(i)

The Corporate Debtor, SLS Power Limited (M/s. Sri Lakshmi Sridevi Power Limited), a limited company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956, is engaged in the business of power generation. It commenced operations in 2001 with a capacity of 6 MW. The power project was set up with a total cost of Rs.25.00 crore and the plant & machineries were financed by the IREDA. On 15.02.2000, the IREDA sanctioned loan assistance of Rs.18.72 crore for setting up the plant and as the unit remained regular in its loan repayments, the IREDA further sanctioned Rs.11.51 crore to renovate, repair, and extend the life of the existing machinery. In addition, the Corporate Debtor availed loans from the State Finance Corporation and Andhra Bank, all of which were serviced promptly. Subsequently, the Financial Creditor took over the loans extended by IREDA and Andhra Bank.

(ii)

On 31.08.2015, the Corporate Debtor addressed a letter to the Financial Creditor, offering as collateral only land admeasuring Ac. 16.29 cents along with buildings and plant and machinery of the power plant located within the corporation limits of Nellore, in the name of SLS Power Limited. The Financial Creditor accepted this collateral as per the Process Note dated 03.09.2015 bearing Reference No. 376/RON/SLS/LAS/2015.

(iii)

Accordingly, the Financial Creditor sanctioned a term loan of Rs.8.65 crore and working capital facility of Rs.9.60 crore in addition to non-fund based limits in the form of inland letter of credit/ bank guarantee for Rs.5.00 crore, aggregating to a total of Rs.23.25 crore, as per the sanction letter dated 30.11.2015. However, the sanction terms also covered properties not offered as collateral and the Corporate Debtor addressed a letter dated 02.12.2015 requesting modification in the sanction terms and conditions regarding the release of original documents pertaining to properties not mortgaged, as those documents were already with the Financial Creditor following the loan takeover from Andhra Bank. Despite repeated written requests dated 12.05.2016, 15.06.2016, and 11.08.2016, along with oral reminders, the Financial Creditor failed to return the said documents.

(iv)

Further, the Dargamitta Branch of the Financial Creditor, where the credit limits were sanctioned, also issued a letter dated 07.06.2016 to the Regional Office, Nellore, vide Ref. No. 208/3462/SLS/2016, seeking release of the original documents not offered as collateral. The Financial Creditor informed the Corporate Debtor that such documents would be returned only upon approval from higher authorities. Out of the total land of Ac. 16.29 cents offered, Ac. 13.43 cents were registered under Mortgage Deed dated 07.05.2016 (Document No. 1914/2016, SRO Nellore) and 03.06.2016 (Document No. 970/2016, SRO Indukurpet) through deposit of title deeds. The remaining Ac. 2.86 cents could not be registered due to technical issues at the Sub-Registrar Office.

(v)

The Corporate Debtor, being a biomass power producing company, supplied electricity to APTRANSCO, suffered significant financial distress due to a reduction in Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) rates by the Government and a sharp rise in fuel costs, which severely impacted the viability of biomass plants across Andhra Pradesh. Beginning in early 2016, the Corporate Debtor’s operations declined drastically due to a market slump, and therefore, it could not continue to operate. With finances critically strained, the Corporate Debtor requested the Financial Creditor to release original documents of properties not given as collateral, so as to enable it to mortgage/sell such assets to raise funds and resume power generation activities.

(vi)

Subsequently, the Corporate Debtor’s loan account was classified as NPA on 02.07.2018 by the Financial Creditor and a demand notice under section13(2) of the SARFAESI Act was issued by the Financial Creditor on 20.07.2018 demanding full repayment. The Corporate Debtor submitted objections on 17.09.2018, but the Financial Creditor failed to respond within 15 days as mandated by Section 13(3A) of the SARFAESI Act. Ignoring the objections, the Financial Creditor issued a possession notice on 06.10.2018 under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, prompting the Corporate Debtor to file S.A. No.382 of 2018 before the Hon’ble DRT, Visakhapatnam along with two IAs bearing No.1838 of 2018 (seeking a stay on all the SARFAESI proceedings) and No.1839 of 2018 (requesting return of original title deeds of unsecured assets).

(vii)

While S.A. No.382 of 2018 was pending, the Financial Creditor, then Syndicate Bank (since merged with Canara Bank), submitted a Memo dated 01.11.2018 before the DRT, withdrawing the possession notice issued on 06.10.2018. The memo clarified that the possession notice had been issued inadvertently, prior to the disposal of objections under Section 13(3A) of the SARFAESI Act.

(viii)

In the pending application, the Corporate Debtor filed a Memo listing the unsecured properties held by the Bank and proposed a schedule for repayment of its outstanding dues. Considering the Bank’s withdrawal of the possession notice and in adherence to principles of natural justice, the Hon’ble DRT held that the Corporate Debtor should be granted an opportunity to discharge its entire liability. Accordingly, the DRT directed the Corporate Debtor to pay the outstanding dues to the Financial Creditor as per the repayment terms specified in its memo.

(ix)

As per the Memo, the Corporate Debtor was required to deposit an amount of Rs.50 lakh within 15 days from the date of release of the unsecured documents by the Financial Creditor. The remaining outstanding amount was to be paid in equal monthly installments, starting from March 2019, up to 31.12.2019, to be credited into the Financial Creditor’s account by the end of each month. The DRT also restrained the Financial Creditor from initiating any action against the scheduled properties of the Corporate Debtor until 31.12.2019. The order further provided that only in the event of default in any monthly installment, the Financial Creditor would be entitled to proceed in accordance with law. The Corporate Debtor did not fail to pay any such installments as stipulated under the Hon'ble DRT's order. The DRT further directed the Financial Creditor to release the unsecured documents identified in the Corporate Debtor’s memo, along with copies of the memoranda of deposit of title deeds dated 07.05.2016 and 03.06.2016, which were unrelated to the mortgaged assets.

(x)

However, the Financial Creditor challenged the DRT's order by filing Writ Petition No.3153 of 2019 before the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh. The Hon’ble High Court suspended the DRT’s order and issued notice to the Corporate Debtor. As on date, the said Writ Petition is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble High Court at Amaravati.

(xi)

Further, the Corporate Debtor reiterated its willingness to fulfil the payment obligations and various OTS proposals, including the one before the DRT, remain pending. Therefore, unless the Hon’ble High Court finally adjudicates the matter or the Corporate Debtor fails to comply with the DRT’s payment schedule, no amount can be said to be legally due.

(xii)

Despite these facts, the Financial Creditor has approached this Adjudicating Authority with unclean hands. The instant Application is neither bona fide nor maintainable, as the alleged debt is not yet due and the Petitioner is not a NPA in terms of applicable law.

(xiii)

The Corporate Debtor has been actively pursuing a OTS proposal of Rs.20.00 crore with the Financial Creditor, without prejudice to its legal rights. The Corporate Debtor paid an amount of Rs.1.92 crore into a no-lien account. In response to the OTS proposal dated 17.04.2025, the Financial Creditor, vide letter dated 16.05.2025, requested a payment of Rs.10.00 crore to strengthen the proposal. However, the Financial Creditor filed the present Application on 21.04.2025. Subsequently, on 08.07.2025, the Financial Creditor asked for a revision of the OTS terms and the Corporate Debtor responded through a letter dated 14.07.2025, revising the proposal amount to Rs.21.00 crore and confirming payment of Rs.4.00 crore into a no-lien account, further stating that the balance would be paid within 45 days from the date of acceptance receipt of the OTS letter from the Financial Creditor.

(xiv)

The OTS proposal is still pending before the Financial Creditor for its approval. Therefore, until both the OTS proposal and the Writ Petition are adjudicated, the debt cannot be considered due.

4.

We have heard the Counsels appearing on behalf of the Financial Creditor and the Corporate Debtor and have perused the pleadings and documents placed on record.

5.

The Application has been filed by the Financial Creditor under Section 7 of the IBC, read with Rule 4 of the IB Rules seeking to initiate the CIRP against the Corporate Debtor for default in repayment of the financial debt. The Corporate Debtor is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 with its registered office in Nellore, Andhra Pradesh, falling within the territorial jurisdiction of this Bench. Hence, the Application is within the jurisdiction of this Adjudicating Authority.

6.

The loan account was classified as a NPA on 02.07.2018 and the instant Application has been filed by the Financial Creditor on 25.04.2025. However, the Financial Creditor submitted that as per the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s Judgment in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020, the Covid-19 period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 shall be excluded from the computation of limitation. The Financial Creditor also submitted that the Corporate Debtor had proposed One-Time Settlement (OTS) offers dated 02.06.2020, 06.01.2023, 23.05.2023 and finally on 23.02.2024, and these OTS proposals are deemed acknowledgments of liability on the part of the Corporate Debtor. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the present Application has been filed within the prescribed period of limitation.

7.

The Financial Creditor has submitted that a sum of Rs.23.25 crore was disbursed to the Corporate Debtor on 26.02.2016 and 19.08.2016. Initially, the loan was granted by the IREDA, and subsequently assigned to the Financial Creditor through an Assignment Deed. The total amount claimed to be in default, including interest as per the Part IV of the Application is Rs. 62,55,18,592.72/-, which has not been disputed by the Corporate Debtor, Therefore, the debt beyond the threshold of Rs. One crore has been established in the case.

8.

It is noted from the DRT Order dated 07.02.2019 in S.A. No. 382 of 2018 that since the Financial Creditor, vide its Memo dated 01.11.2028 had withdrawn the possession notice dated 06.10.2018 and in view of the payment schedule memo filed by the Corporate Debtor, the S.A. No. 382 of 2018 was disposed of without going into merits and demerits of the case. It is also observed that the DRT, while disposing of the SA, directed the Corporate Debtor to pay the entire outstanding amount to the Financial Creditor in the manner i.e. Rs.50 lakh in 15 days from the date of release of unsecured documents by the Financial Creditor and balance amount in equal monthly instalments by the end of each month starting from March 2019 till 30.11.2019. The Order further states that in case of failure to pay two monthly instalments by the Corporate Debtor, the Financial Creditor would be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. The relevant extract of the above Order is as under:

7.

Heard both sides. Perused the SA, reply and the memos along objections. However, having gone through facts and circumstances of the case and since the respondent bank vide its memo dt.1.11.2018 withdrawing the possession notice dt.6.10.2018 which is subject matter of the SA and in view of payment schedule memo filed by applicant, this SA is being disposed of without going into merits and demerits of the case of the applicants and respondent bank, and therefore, in the interest of principles of natural justice to give an opportunity to the applicants to discharge the entire outstanding due amount to the respondent bank as per the payment schedule given by them in their memo dt.30.1.2019, by taking into consideration of the memo filed by the applicants and respondent bank as the applicants/petitioners have come forward to pay an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- within 15 days from the date of release of unsecured documents and to discharge the entire outstanding amount due to the respondent bank by 30.11.2019, it would be just and appropriate to give an opportunity to the petitioners/applicants to discharge the entire outstanding amount due to the respondent bank by 30.11.2019 in equal monthly installments.

Therefore, it is directed to the applicants/petitioners to discharge and pay the entire outstanding amount to the respondent bank in the manner i.e., an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs Only) to be deposited by the applicants/petitioners into the respondent bank within 15 days from the date of release of unsecured documents by the respondent bank and the balance outstanding amount due in equal monthly installments to be paid by the end of each month starting from March, 2019 till 30.11.2019 into the respondent bank, and the respondent bank directed not to take further action under SARFAESI Act in respect of schedule mentioned property till 30.11.2019 from the date of this order for payment of entire outstanding amount due. However, if the applicants failed to pay any two consecutive monthly installments stated supra, into the respondent bank, the respondent bank is at liberty to proceed further in the matter in accordance with law. So far as release of unsecured documents as mentioned in the memo filed by the applicants along with copies of memorandum of deposit of title deeds dt.7.5.2016 and 3.6.2016 are concerned, the respondent bank is directed to release those unsecured documents as mentioned in the memo forthwith to the applicants, which are not covered under the memorandum of deposit of title deeds in respect of loan facilities sanctioned to the applicants.

9.

It is also noted that against the DRT Order, the Financial Creditor filed a Writ Petition before the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, and obtained interim stay vide order dated 13.03.2019 in WP No. 3153 of 2019. The relevant extract of the above Order is as under:

Exhibit reproduced from the original judgment
Exhibit reproduced from the original judgment
10.

It is argued by the Counsel of the Corporate Debtor that in view of the interim order passed by the Hon’ble High Court and pending of the Writ Petition before the Hon’ble High Court, the present Section 7 Application filed by the Financial Creditor is not maintainable. We observe that even after passing the DRT order, the Corporate Debtor has not paid the amount in compliance of the DRT Order, and the order of Hon’ble DRT itself categorically stated that if the Corporate Debtor commits any default in payment of any two consecutive monthly instalments, the Financial Creditor is granted a liberty to proceed against the Corporate Debtor in accordance with law. Hence, the contention raised by the Corporate Debtor is not maintainable.

11.

It is also contended that the date of default in the Application is mentioned to be 02.07.2018, however, the above date of default would get shifted in view of the Hon’ble DRT order and accordingly, there is no default as per the Order of the Hon’ble DRT read with Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court. However, we observe two key aspects: first, that the order of the Hon’ble DRT is not in operation due to the interim suspension granted by the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Writ Petition No. 3153 of 2019 dated 13.03.2019; and second, that the Corporate Debtor itself has not complied with the directions issued by the Hon’ble DRT order dated 07.02.2019, and by virtue of the Hon’ble DRT order itself, that order would become inoperative. In view of the above, the date of default, in terms of the loan agreement would be applicable and that date of default has been established by the Financial Creditor. Therefore, we are not inclined to admit the contentions raised by the Corporate Debtor and are of the considered view that the default in this case has also been established.

12.

In Section 7 Application, this Adjudicating Authority has to see whether there is a ‘debt’ and ‘default’ in repayment thereof. In this case, both debt and default have established. We also observe that the Application filed by the Financial Creditor is complete in all respects.

13.

As a sequel to the discussion above, the present Application bearing CP (IB)/18/7/AMR/2025 filed by the Financial Creditor under Section 7 of the IBC for initiating CIRP against the Corporate Debtor, namely, M/s. SLS POWER LIMITED (CIN: U40109AP1998PLC030682), is hereby admitted and accordingly, the Moratorium is declared in terms of Section 14 of the Code:

(i)

Moratorium under Section 14 (1) for prohibiting all of the following, namely:

(a)

The institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the Corporate Debtor including execution of any judgement, 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 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 Corporate Debtor.

(ii)

It is hereby clarified that notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, a licence, permit, registration, quota, concession, clearance or a similar grant or right given by the Central Government, State Government, local authority, sectoral regulator or any other authority constituted under any other law for the time being in force, shall not be suspended or terminated on the grounds of insolvency, subject to the condition that there is no default in payment of current dues arising for the use or continuation of the license, permit, registration, quota, concession, clearances or a similar grant or right during the moratorium period;

(iii)

The provisions of sub-section of section 14(1) shall not apply to such transactions, agreements or other arrangement, as may be notified by the Central Government in consultation with any financial sector regulator or any other authority; and also to a surety in a contract of guarantee to a corporate debtor.

(iv)

The supply of essential goods or services to the Corporate Debtor, as may be specified, shall not be terminated or suspended or interrupted during moratorium period, except where such Corporate Debtor has not paid dues arising from such supply during the moratorium period or in such circumstances, as may be specified.

(v)

The order of moratorium shall have effect from the date of this order till the completion of the CIRP or until this Bench approves the resolution plan under sub-section (1) of Section 31 or passes an order for liquidation of the Corporate Debtor under Section 33 as the case may be.

14.

As per Part III of Form 1 of the Application, the Financial Creditor has proposed the name of Mr. Chinnam Poorna Chandra Rao as Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) in the matter and has also filed his written consent dated 23.07.2024 affirming that he is eligible to be appointed as IRP in respect of the Corporate Debtor and certified that there are no disciplinary proceedings pending against him. The credentials of the proposed IRP was verified on the IBBI website, which shows that proposed IRP holds the valid AFA up to 31.12.2025, The relevant extract of the IBBI website is given below:

Exhibit reproduced from the original judgment
15.

Accordingly, we hereby appoint Mr. Chinnam Poorna Chandra Rao, Registration No. IBBI/IPA-003/IP-N000119/2017-2018/11298, email [email protected] having registered address at Flat No.G1, Cloud9 Heights, 7-1/F5/6/A/1, Road No.8, Panchavati Colony, Manikonda, K.V. Ranga Reddy Distt., Hyderabad, Ranga Reddy, Telangana-500089, as IRP in the instant matter, with the following directions: -

(i)

The term of appointment of Mr. Chinnam Poorna Chandra Rao shall be in accordance with the provisions of Section 16(5) of the Code, subject to his written consent to be filed within 7 days of this order;

(ii)

In terms of Section 17 of the Code, from the date of this appointment, the powers of the Board of Directors shall stand suspended and the management of the affairs shall vest with the IRP and the officers and the managers of the Corporate Debtor shall report to the IRP, who shall be enjoined to exercise all the powers, as are vested with the IRP and strictly perform all the duties as are enjoined on the IRP under Section 18 and other relevant provisions of the Code, including taking control and custody of the assets, over which the Corporate Debtor has ownership rights recorded in the balance sheet of the Corporate Debtor, etc. as provided in Section 18(1)(f) of the Code. The IRP is directed to prepare a complete list of the inventory of assets of the Corporate Debtor;

(iii)

The IRP shall strictly act in accordance with the Code, all the rules framed thereunder by the Board or the Central Government and in accordance with the Code of Conduct governing his profession and as an Insolvency Professional with high standards of ethics and moral;

(iv)

The IRP shall cause a public announcement within three days as contemplated under Regulation 6 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 of the initiation of the CIRP in terms of Section 13(1)(b) read with Section 15 of the Code calling for the submission of claims against Corporate Debtor;

(v)

The IRP/RP shall prepare the Audited Financial Statements as on date of the CIRP and shall submit before the CoC for consideration.

(vi)

The IRP/RP shall also ensure that all the assets appearing in the Financial Statements on the CIRP date have been considered in the valuation report. The IRP/RP shall send individual communication through post or electronic means along with a copy of public announcement to all the creditors as per last available books of accounts / financial statements on the CIRP date of Corporate Debtor as prescribed under Regulation 6A of IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016.

(vii)

The Corporate Debtor, its Directors, personnel and the persons associated with the management shall extend all cooperation to the IRP in managing the affairs of the Corporate Debtor as a going concern and extend all cooperation in accessing books and records as well as assets of the Corporate Debtor;

(viii)

The Suspended Board of Directors is directed to give complete access to the Books of Accounts of the Corporate Debtor maintained under Section 128 of the Companies Act. In case, the books are maintained in the electronic mode, the Suspended Board of Directors are to share with the Resolution Professional all the information regarding Maintaining the Backup and regarding Service Provider kept under Rule 3(5) and Rule 3(6) of the Companies Accounts Rules, 2014 respectively as effective from 11.08.2022, especially the name of the service provider, the internet protocol of the Service Provider and its location, and also address of the location of the Books of Accounts maintained in the cloud. In case accounting software for maintaining the books of accounts is used by the Corporate Debtor, then IRP/RP is to check that the audit trail in the same is not disabled as required under the notification dated 24.03.2021 of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs. A reference is made to the provisions of Section 128(5) of the Companies Act, 2013, whereby every company should maintain its books of accounts for not less than eight financial years immediately preceding a financial year. Minutes and statutory records are the principal documents of the company that should be maintained and preserved since inception.

(ix)

In view of the above mandatory provisions, the suspended Directors of the Board will ensure that the books of accounts for the eight previous financial years preceding the date of this order be made available to the IRP/RP within 15 days of the initiation of the CIRP order. The Statutory Auditor is also directed to share the records maintained by him in the course of the audit of the accounts of the Corporate Debtor for the period of three years prior to the date of initiation of this CIRP order within the same period of 15 days.

(x)

In case of any non-cooperation by the Suspended Board of Directors or the Statutory Auditors, the IRP/RP may take the help of the police authorities to enforce this order. The concerned police authorities are directed to extend help to the IRP/RP in implementing this order for retrieval of relevant information from the systems of the Corporate Debtor, the IRP/RP may take the assistance of Digital Forensic Experts empanelled with this Bench for this purpose. The Suspended Board of Directors is also directed to hand over all user IDs and passwords relating to the Corporate Debtor, particularly for government portals, for various compliances. The IRP is also directed to make a specific mention of non-compliance, if any, in this regard in his status report filed before this Adjudicating Authority immediately after a month of the initiation of the CIRP.

(xi)

The IRP/RP is directed to approach the Government Departments, Banks, Corporate Bodies and other entities with request for information/documents available with those authorities/institutions/others pertaining to the Corporate Debtor, which would be relevant in the CIRP. The Government Departments, Banks, Corporate Bodies and other entities are directed to render the necessary information and cooperation to the IRP/RP to enable him to conduct the CIRP as per law.

(xii)

The IRP shall, after collation of all the claims received against the Corporate Debtor and the determination of the operational position of the Corporate Debtor constitute a Committee of Creditors and shall file a report, certifying constitution of the Committee to this Adjudicating Authority on or before the expiry of thirty days from the date of his appointment, and shall convene first meeting of the Committee within seven days of filing the report of constitution of the Committee;

(xiii)

The IRP shall also serve a copy of this order to all relevant statutory departments such as Income Tax, GST (Centre and State), Provident Fund authorities, trade unions, and employee associations to inform them about the commencement of CIRP.

(xiv)

The IRP is directed to send a regular progress report to this Adjudicating Authority every fortnight.

16.

The Financial Creditor is directed to deposit Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs only) with the IRP to meet out the expense to perform the functions assigned to him in accordance with Regulation 6 of the IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016. The amount, however, will be subject to adjustment by the Committee of Creditors as to be duly accounted for by IRP and shall be paid back to the Financial Creditor.

17.

A copy of this Order shall immediately be communicated to the Financial Creditor, the Corporate Debtor, IBBI, and the IRP named above by the Court Officer/ Registry of this Adjudicating Authority.

Accordingly, CP (IB)/18/7/AMR/2025 stands admitted.