Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2024) 01 NCLAT CK 3499

Mr. Kathiravan vs Canara Bank & Anr.

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, CHENNAI Bench · Decided on 31 January 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
M. Venugopal, Member (Judicial) · Ajai Das Mehrotra, Member (Technical)
CASE NUMBER
Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No.21/2024 (IA Nos. 69 & 113 / 2024)

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

6 paragraphs · 431 words

ORDER

Mr. AK. Mylsamy, Learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the Appellant in the instant Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 21 / 2024, brings to the notice of this `Tribunal’ that the `One Time Settlement Proposal’ of the Appellant, dated 30.01.2024, was accepted by the Respondent No. 1 / Canara Bank and further, that the Bank has permitted the Appellant’s One Time Settlement Proposal, and out of Rs.76 Crores, in respect of the Full & Final Settlement of dues, in the Account of M/s. Shree Basaveshwar Sugars Limited, the Appellant has remitted an amount of Rs.38 Crores, being upfront amount (50% of the O.T.S. Offer), has already paid and kept in no-lien Account, to be adjusted immediately, and the balance O.T.S. amount of Rs.38 Crores, payable on or before 31.03.2024.

The Learned Counsel Ms. P. Chitra Nirmala, appearing for the Respondent No. 1 / Canara Bank and the Learned Counsel Mr. KS. Sundar, appearing for the Respondent No. 2 / Interim Resolution Professional, had not disputed the factum of O.T.S. Offer, projected by the Appellant, being permitted by the Respondent No. 1 / Canara Bank.

Considering the fact that the Respondent No. 1 / Bank and the Respondent No. 2 / IRP, had not disputed the factum of O.T.S. Offer, permitted by the Respondent No. 1 / Bank and this `Tribunal’, taking note of the fact that Rs.38 Crores, being the upfront amount (50% of O.T.S. Offer), paid by the Appellant already and for the remaining payment of Rs.38 Crores, to be paid by the Appellant, on or before 31.03.2024.

At this juncture, the Learned Counsel for the Appellant, seeks permission from this `Tribunal’, to withdraw the instant Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 21 / 2024 and acceding to the said request, the instant Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 21 / 2024 is `Dismissed as Withdrawn’. No costs. However, this `Tribunal’, quite in the fitness of things, directs the Respondent No. 2 / IRP to file Section 12A Application of the I & B Code, 2016, before the `Adjudicating Authority’, coupled with Regulation 30A, within `one week from Today’, and in the event of necessary `Interlocutory Application’ filed, as per the requirement of the Code and Regulations, the `Adjudicating Authority’ / `Tribunal’, shall number the said Application and to dispose of the said `Interlocutory Application’, within 10 days from the date of `Hearing’ of the said `Interlocutory Application’. Further, till the `disposal of Interlocutory Application’, filed as per the I & B Code, 2016, the `Committee of Creditors’, shall not be constituted.

The connected pending `Interlocutory Applications’, are `Closed’.