Page 411 - IBC Orders us 7-CA Mukesh Mohan

Order Passed Under Sec 7
Hon’ble NCLT Allahabad Bench

humble view the judgments as referred to on behalf of the Corporate Debtor Companies are
distinguishable and may not apply to the the present case. As the facts & circumstances of the case were t
before the Honible Bombay High Court in the matter of IDFC td. vi s Ruehi So a Industries Ltd as in that

case the other creditors came forward to oppose the winding up petition, which is not the ease here before
this Tribunal as during the course of hearing through. the Corporate Debtor Company the views from the

lead Bank of the Consortium Bank were expected by informing such it about the pendency and current
proceedings before the JLF but no member other than the applicant Bank came forward to express its
view on the maintainability o f present application and opted to remain silent. Moreover, it is a fact the

functioning of the JLF is now not workable since the Corporate Debtor Company has been declared as a
wilful defaulter, That apart the Hon'ble NCLT in the matter of Annapurna Infrastructure Pvt. l .td. vis
Soril Resources Ltd. took a Iliew on such issue rvliere an adjudication betwlien the same parties is

pending in a Court having jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the same and a subsequently instituted suit on
the basis of same issue between the same parties cannot he allowed to proceed. While, we feel that the
pendency of the suit is distinguishable from restructuring of debts or resolution plan pending mulct.

consideration before the Joint Lender's Forum, Moreover, the lion' ble Supreme Court in the above
referred recent judement in the matter of Innoventive Industries Ltd. vis ICICI Bank & Anr. has ruled to

set u p i Euidelines and pleased to issue a mandate to us b observin as such 'because this is very first
licalion that has been moved under the Code, we thou ht it necessary to deliver a detailed judgment so that
all Courts and Tribunals ma take notice of a )aradi in shift i n the law. Entrenched managments are no

loir ,er allowed to coptinue in management if they cannot pay their debts."

The Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 has been passed alter at deliberation and pursuant to

various committee reports, the most important of which is the report of the Bankruptcy Law Reforms
Commitiee of November, 1015. The Statement ()I-Objects & Reasons 1' the Code read as under:

"STA TEMENT OF OBJECTS & REASONS There is no single law in _India lhat
fleas with Insavency and an ProvisionN relating to insolvency and bankruptcy frr

companies ran b and in the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act,
1985, the Recovery of Debt Due to Banks and Financial Msfitutions Act, 1993, the
Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enpreentent of Security

Interest d, 2002 and the Companies Act, 2013. These statutes provide for creation of
mu/1111k ,for a such as Board of In and Financial Reconstruction (/311-1?), Debt
Recovery Tribunal (DRT) and ,National Coinpfiny La 'v Tribunal (NCL T) illrd their

respective Appellate Tribunals. Liquidation qf companies is handled by the High
Courts. In Bankruptcy & Insolvency is dealt with under the Presidency Towns

411