Page 754 - IBC Orders us 7-CA Mukesh Mohan

Order Passed under Sec 7
By Hon’ble NCLT Mumbai Bench
request of the Respondent the Cash Credit Facility came to be renewed from time to time as a

regular limit. Thereafter in the month of August, 2011, the Respondent applied for sanction of
Renewal and enhancement of Cash Credit Limit from Rs. 100 lakhs to Rs. 250 Lakhs and Cheque
Discount Facility of Rs. 25 Lakhs. After due scrutiny the Applicant on 26.08.2011 sanctioned the

same.
5. It is further submitted that, the Respondent has also issued Promissory Notes dated 22.06.2010

and 16.09.2011 in favour of Applicant which are annexed as Annexure B and C, respectively, to
this Application.
6. It is also submitted that, the accounts of the Respondent were classified as 'Non Performing

Assets' on 31.07.212 as per the guidelines of the RBI. in respect of Cash Credit Account and
Mortgaged Loan Account. The said default is in continues till date.
7. Moreover, it is submitted that, the Ld. Arbitrator appointed under S. 84 of the Multi-State Co-Op.

Societies Act, 2002 has passed an Award dated 21.09.2013in favour of the Applicant, inter-alia
allowed the Dispute Application filed the Applicant.
8. The Ld. Counsel for the Applicant has stated that, Loan Application by the Respondent, Copy of

Sanction Letter, Agreement of Loan dated 22.06.2010, undertaking given by the Respondent in
respect of Mortgaged Loan, Undertaking given by Respondent in respect of Cash Credit Loan and

Undertaking given by the Respondents in respect of Cheque Discount Facility are annexed as
Annexure K, Annexure L, Annexure O, Annexure P, Annexure Q respectively, to this
Application.

9. Further it is submitted that, this application under I&B Code, 2016, filed before the Tribunal, is
also served upon the Respondent and to that effect the tracking report of India Speed Post is
submitted along with Affidavit of Service dated 3rd August, 2017 before this Tribunal. But no

one from the side of Respondent has approached either before Tribunal or to the Applicants
10. It is further submitted that, the non-appearance or non-communication of the Corporate Debtor
has thus established that, the Corporate Debtor has nothing to say in defence in respect of the

impugned outstanding/claimed amount.
11. FINDINGS :- Considering the above facts, it is established by the Financial Creditor that the

nature of Debt is a "Financial Debt" as defined under section 5 (8) of the Code. It has also been
established that admittedly there is a "Default" as defined under section 3 (12) of the Code on the
part of the Corporate Debtor. On the basis of the evidences on record the Petitioner/Financial

Creditor has established that the loan was sanctioned and duly disbursed to the Corporate Debtor
but there is non-payment of Debt on the part of the Corporate Debtor.

754