Tribunals and CommissionsFull Bench(2022) 08 NCLAT CK 0034

Chandrakant Hiralal Shah Director (Suspended) vs Beacon Trusteeship Ltd. & Anr

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal · Decided on 12 August 2022

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ashok Bhushan, Chairperson · Rakesh Kumar, Member (J) · Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra, Member (T)
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 590 Of 2022

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

4 paragraphs · 295 words
1.

Heard learned counsel for the Appellant as well as learned counsel appearing for the Respondent. This Appeal has been filed against order dated 04.05.2022 by which order the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Mumbai Bench-IV has admitted Section 7 application filed by the Respondent No.1. The Adjudicating Authority has recorded finding that there is default by the Corporate Debtor in payment of debt amount. The application was filed for a claim of Rs.502,91,64,495/-and the date of default is 30.04.2019. The Adjudicating Authority after hearing the parties has recorded finding in Para 16 of the impugned order, which is to the following effect:-

“16. On perusal of the documents submitted by the Applicant, it is clear that financial debt amounting to more than Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Only) is due and payable by the Corporate Debtor to the Applicant. There is default by the Corporate Debtor in payment of debt amount. Therefore, we do not have any objection on record against the application filed for initiation of CIRP against the Corporate Debtor.

a) The application is complete and has been filed under the proper form. The debt amount is more than Rupees One Crore and default of the Corporate Debtor has been established and the application deserves to be admitted.”

2.

We  do  not  find  any  error  in  the  impugned  order  passed  by  the Adjudicating Authority admitting Section 7 application. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that after passing of the order the Appellant approached the Financial Creditor for settlement. We are of the view that if any settlement is entered, it is open for the Appellant to take recourse of Section  12A. Learned  counsel  for  the  Respondent  has  denied  that  any settlement talks are going on. With these observations, we dismiss this Appeal.