Allowed

M/S.Hewlett-Packard Financial Services (India) Private Limited, Rep.by Its Company Secretary v. M/S.Everonn Education Limited

Madras HC9 Oct 2020COMP.A/221/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Company Judge allowed an application to condone a 316-day delay in filing Form No.66 (affidavit of proof of debt) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The court found the reasons regarding inadvertence of advertisement and lockdown restrictions satisfactory.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of delay of 316 days in filing Form No.66 allowed; No order as to costs.

M/S.Hewlett-Packard Financial Services (India)… — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

Company Application No.221 of 2020 in CP.No.375 of 2014

¶2

Company Application No.221 of 2020 in

¶3

CP.No.375 of 2014

¶4

M.SUNDAR, J

¶5

'Everonn Education Limited' [hereinafter 'said company' for the sake of

¶6

brevity and clarity] is the company under liquidation in the main Company Petition at the instance of a petitioning creditor.

¶7

Captioned application has been filed with a prayer to condone the delay of 316 days in filing the affidavit of proof of debt in Form No.66.

¶8

Mr.Arun Karthik Mohan, learned counsel on record for applicant and Mr.Bavisetty Sridhar, learned 'Deputy Official Liquidator' [hereinafter

¶9

'Deputy OL' for the sake of brevity] representing the 'Official Liquidator attached to this Court' [hereinafter 'OL' for the sake of brevity] are before me in this web hearing on a video conferencing platform.

¶10

Adverting to the affidavit filed in support of captioned application, learned counsel for applicant draws the attention of this Court to paragraphs 5, 6 and 7, which read as follows:

¶11

'5. I state that the Applicant has its places of business inter alia at Bengaluru, Gurgaon and Mumbai. I state that by inadvertence, the Applicant missed taking note of the aforesaid

¶12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 1/4

¶13

Company Application No.221 of 2020 in CP.No.375 of 2014

¶14

advertisement of the Official Liquidator dated 11.08.2019, calling for claims from the creditors of Everonn Education Limited.

¶15

6. I state that during the 3^rd week of September, 2019, on instructions, Applicant's advocate inquired with the office of the Official Liquidator regarding the publication of the advertisement calling for claims and it was only during the 4^th week of September, 2019 that the Applicant came to know that the advertisement had already been effected and that the last day for submission of claims by Respondent's creditors was 10.09.2019.

¶16

7. I state that the Applicant made immediate and sincere efforts to collate all information and documents relevant to this case and the Form No.66 to be submitted on behalf of the Applicant, yet, the Applicant was able to get the Form.66 executed and notarized by the Deponent in Bengaluru only by 16.03.2020. However, in view of the Covid-19 restrictions, which were imposed in the State of Karnataka from 13.03.2020 onwards, the Bengaluru office of the Applicant has been operating remotely and since the courier and other postal services were also unavailable during the initial phases of the nation wide lockdown imposed, the executed and notarized Form No.66 could not be dispatched to the Counsel at Chennai at the time.'

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 2/4

¶18

Company Application No.221 of 2020 in CP.No.375 of 2014

¶19

Learned counsel submits that the aforementioned paragraphs

¶20

capture the reason for delay, the manner in which, the applicant gained knowledge and the steps taken thereafter.

¶21

Be that as it may, what is of significance is, learned Deputy OL

¶22

representing the OL submits that he has no serious objection or opposition to

¶23

this application.

¶24

This Court, having perused the affidavit filed in support of

¶25

application, having heard learned counsel for applicant, having been satisfied that the prayer in the captioned application deserves to be acceded to, captioned application allowed. There shall be no order as to Costs.

¶26

Though obvious, it is made clear that Form No.66, which is taken on

¶27

file by the OL will be dealt with on its own merits and in accordance with law by the OL.

¶28

09.10.2020

¶29

kmi

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 3/4

¶31

Company Application No.221 of 2020 in CP.No.375 of 2014

¶32

M.SUNDAR. J

¶33

kmi

¶34

Company Application No.221 of 2020 in
CP.No.375 of 2014

¶35

09.10.2020

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 4/4

M/S.Hewlett-Packard Financial Services (India) Private Limited, Rep.by Its Company Secretary v. M/S.Everonn Education Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Hewlett-Packard Financial Services (India) Private Limited, Rep.by Its Company Secretary v. M/S.Everonn Education Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s. Nataraja Constructions, Vs The Integrated Waste and Urban Services Company (Tamilnadu) Limited (Iwmust), Chennai

Nalini Rajkumar Vs M/S.Geojit Bnp Paribas

The General Manager Souther Railway Vs Eagle-Omega and Kr and Co.(Jv) Represented by Its Legal Partner Mr.C.Karnan

The Federal Bank Limited, Asset Recovery Branch Vs The Official Liquidator, As a Liquidator of Kothari Orient Finance Ltd. (In Liquidation)

The Official Liquidator as the Liquidator of Leo Finance and Chit Funds Limited (In Liquidation) Vs Nil

China Datang Technologies and Engineering Co. Ltd. Vs Nlc India Limited and Another