Allowed

In the matter of Precision Containeurs Limited Cp (Ib) No. 2146-MB-IV-2019

NCLT10 Mar 2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Adjudicating Authority admitted the application under Section 7 of the I&B Code filed by SASF against Precision Containers for CIRP. The court found the debt and default established, rejected Covid-19 moratorium defenses, declared moratorium under Section 14, and appointed an IRP.

What did the court decide?

Admission of CIRP, declaration of moratorium under Section 14, appointment of Ramnarayan Rajaraman as IRP, and direction to applicant to deposit expenses.

In the matter of Precision Containeurs Limited Cp (Ib)… — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | NCLT (2022)

¶1

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶2

CP (IB) No.2146/MB-IV/2019

¶3

Under Section 7 of the I&B Code, 2016

¶4

In the matter of:

¶5

Stressed Assets Stabilization Fund

¶6

…Financial Creditor/Applicant

¶7

V/s

¶8

Precision Containers Limited

¶9

[CIN: L28920MH1981PLC023972]

¶10

...Corporate Debtor/Respondent

¶11

Order Dated: 10.03.2022

¶12

Coram:

¶13

Mr. Rajesh Sharma Mrs. Suchitra Kanuparthi Hon’ble Member (Technical) Hon’ble Member (Judicial)

¶14

Appearances (via videoconferencing):

¶15

For the Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. Yash Jariwala, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s)	:	Ms. Jyoti A. Singh a/w mr.
		Sakil Ansari, Advocates.

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Per: Rajesh Sharma, Member (Technical)

¶18

This is an application being C.P. (IB) No. 2146/NCLT/MB/CIV/2019 filed by Stressed Assets Stabilization Fund (SASF), the

¶19

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNALMUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶20

CP (IB) No. 2146/MB-IV/2019

¶21

Financial Creditor/Applicant, under section 7 of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (I&B Code) against Precision Containers Limited, Corporate Debtor, for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).

¶22

The Application is filed by Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh, authorised representative of Financial Creditor vide Power of Attorney dated 09.05.2019, claiming total default of Rs.5,92,90,31,326/- (Rupees five hundred ninety-two crore ninety lakh thirty-one thousand three hundred twenty-six only).

¶23

The Date of Default as mentioned in the Petition is 01.04.2000. The Petition is filed on 06.06.2019.

¶24

The case of the Financial Creditor is as under:

¶25

a) The Financial Creditor has provided Loan Facility to the Corporate Debtor in the following ways:

¶26

Sanctioned	Disbursed
Rs.700 lakh (First Loan) sanctioned on 03.08.1995	Rs.700 lakh disbursed on 04.08.1995
Rs.300 lakh (NCD Loan) Sanctioned on 21.12.1998	Rs.300 lakh disbursed on 02.02.1999
Rs.1100 lakh (Second Loan) Sanctioned on 31.08.1999	Rs.1020 lakh disbursed on 06.11.1999

¶27

Page 2 of 19

¶28

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNALMUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶29

CP (IB) No. 2146/MB-IV/2019

¶30

b) The loan was re-scheduled on 31.03.2001.

¶31

c) The first loan was disbursed fully and the second loan was disbursed to the extent of Rs.1020 lakh.

¶32

d) On 07.06.2000 lastly mortgage was extended. The Corporate Debtor committed default on 01.04.2000 and therefore vide Recall Notice dated 27.02.2002 and 28.02.2002 credit facilities were recalled.

¶33

e) The Financial Creditor had filed Reference before BIFR and it remained pending. After repeal of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 [SICA Act] w.e.f. 01.12.2016 all the reference before BIFR/AAIFR stand abated. BIFR at the last hearing held on 13.07.2016 issued the directions as under:

¶34

“The Company to personally discuss the OTS proposal with SASF who may initiate to the Company the acceptable OTS amount and submit the report thereof regarding the settlement.”

¶35

f) The details of the default is as under:

¶36

Facility	Amount in default	Date of default
First Loan (Rs.700 lakh)	3,15,00,000/-	01.01.2000
NCD Loan Rs.300 lakh	3,00,00,000/-	01.07.2003
Second Loan Rs.1100 lakh	10,20,00,000/-	01.01.2001

¶37

g) The Financial Creditor has filed following documents attached to the Petition:

¶38

Page 3 of 19

¶39

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNALMUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶40

CP (IB) No. 2146/MB-IV/2019

¶41

i. Loan Agreement dated 03.08.1995 at pp 17-35 of the Petition;

¶42

ii. Subscription Agreement dated 21.12.1998 at pp 36-62 of the Petition;

¶43

iii. Loan Agreement dated 31.08.1999 at pp 63-81 of the Petition;

¶44

iv. Deed of Hypothecation dated 31.08.1995 at pp.107-12 of the Petition;

¶45

v. Deed of Hypothecation dated 21.07.1998 at pp.123-130 of the Petition;

¶46

vi. Deed of Hypothecation dated 31.08.1999 at pp.131-145 of the Petition;

¶47

vii. Loan Recall Notice dated 27.02.2002 at pp 146-155 of the Petition;

¶48

viii. Loan Recall Notice dated 28.02.2002 at pp 156-162 of the Petition;

¶49

ix. Statement of Accounts at pp 163-201 of the Petition;

¶50

x. The Trust Deed dated 24.09.2004 at pp 202-209 of the Petition;

¶51

xi. Notification of SASF i.e. Financial Creditor dated 20.09.2004 issued by the Ministry of the Finance, Department of Economic Affairs declaring the Financial Creditor as the Financial Institution at p.210 of the Petition;

¶52

xii. Transfer Deed dated 30.09.2004 at pp 211-236 of the Petition;

¶53

Page 4 of 19

¶54

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNALMUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶55

CP (IB) No. 2146/MB-IV/2019

¶56

xiii. OTS Letter dated 02.05.2019 at pp 237-239 of the Petition;

¶57

xiv. OTS Revocation Letter dated 11.10.2007 at pp 240-245 of the Petition.

¶58

Financial Creditor has filed the Additional Affidavit dated 01.11.2019 and submits as under:

¶59

a) The Financial Creditor has inadvertently not mentioned the amount due as on date of filing the Application. In Part-IV, second column of the Application, the amount due mentioned is Rs.28,06,14,272/(Rupees twenty-eight crore six lakh twenty-four thousand two hundred seventy-two only) which is amount due on date of default as mentioned in Recall Notices dated 27.02.2002 and 28.02.2002.

¶60

b) As per Annexure-5 of the Petition, Rs.5,92,90,31,326/- (Rupees five hundred ninety-two crore ninety lakh thirty-one thousand three hundred twenty-six only) is payable by the Corporate Debtor to the Financial Creditor. The Financial Creditor has produced statement of Accounts for entire claim mentioned at Annexure-5 in the Petition.

¶61

c) The Financial Creditor submitted that as on date claim of the Financial Creditor be read as per Annexure-5 and as on default claim of the Financial Creditor be read as per the Recall Notices dated 27.02.2002 and 28.02.2002.

¶62

Financial Creditor has filed the Additional Affidavit dated 11.11.2019 and submits as under:

¶63

Page 5 of 19

¶64

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNALMUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶65

CP (IB) No. 2146/MB-IV/2019

¶66

a) The Corporate Debtor has committed the default on 01.01.2000. The Corporate Debtor approached the BIFR under section 15 of SICA Act and filed reference for declaration as sick unit. The reference was registered with BIFR in January, 2002 and on 19^th August, 2004 BIFR admitted reference. The reference remained pending with BIFR till SICA Act was repealed on 01.12.2016. No recovery proceedings could have been filed between January, 2002 to 01.12.2016 due to section 22 of SICA Act.

¶67

b) In June, 2008, SASF had approved OTS proposal for envisaging payment of Rs.4.00 crore in cash and issue of 7 lakh Equity Shares in furtherance thereof the Corporate Debtor allotted 2 lakh Equity Shares to SASF in June 2008 and transferred 5 lakh shares in May, 2009. However, it defaulted on payments as per the approved OTS terms. The OTS was extended from time to time till 31.03.2011 with interest @13.25% from 01.04.2008. The OTS was revoked in June 2011 due to non-payment of cash component. Subsequently, at the request of the Corporate Debtor, SASF agreed to extend time up to 15.01.2012 for clearance of dues. The OTS was finally revoked in September, 2012.

¶68

c) The Corporate Debtor admitted OTS proposal in terms of sanction letter dated 06.07.2016. The Corporate Debtor vide letter dated 05.04.2018 reiterated their earlier offer and hence the same was rejected by the Financial Creditor.

¶69

The Corporate Debtor has filed Affidavit in reply dated 11.10.2019 to the Additional Affidavit dated 30.09.2019 and 11.11.2019 filed by the Financial Creditor and submits as under:

¶70

Page 6 of 19

¶71

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNALMUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶72

CP (IB) No. 2146/MB-IV/2019

¶73

a) The Corporate Debtor is a small enterprise registered with the Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprise. The present Petition is not maintainable as the amounts claimed by the Applicant under the present Petition being Rs.28,06,24,272/(Rupees twenty-eight crore six lakh twenty-four thousand two hundred and seventy-two only) is not an admitted amount and hence disputed.

¶74

b) Further, the Financial Creditor has failed to place on record several communications concerning the Onetime Settlement Offers given by the Corporate Debtor to the Financial Creditor post revocation of settlement vide OTS revocation letter dated September 24, 2012 (Page 245 of Petition), which would establish the crystallized settlement amount between the parties. Pursuant to the OTS approval letter dated October 11, 2007 bearing Ref. No.5588 SASF/GSS (Exhibit-19) (i) from total cash component of Rs.4,00,00,000/- (Rupees four crore only), an amount of Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees one crore only) was paid upfront to the Applicant and out of the balance Rs.3,00,00,000/- (Rupees three crore only), Rs.1,14,00,000/- (Rupees one crore fourteen lakh only) was paid by the Corporate Debtor and only an amount of Rs.1,86,00,000/- (Rupees one crore eighty-six lakh only) remained unpaid. Further, as per the second condition of OTS approval letter, allotment of 7 lakhs nos. equity shares were allotted/transferred in favour of the Financial Creditor by the Corporate Debtor. An amount of Rs.1,06,38,092 (Rupees one crore six lakh thirty-eight thousand ninety-two only) is lying with the Financial Creditor (arising out of share of SASF on account of sale of Vapi Unit by the

¶75

Page 7 of 19

¶76

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNALMUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶77

CP (IB) No. 2146/MB-IV/2019

¶78

Asset Sale Committee constituted under order of the BIFR). Post revocation of OTS by the Financial Creditor vide letter dated September 24, 2012, the aforesaid amount was lying with SASF being pro rata amount distributed as per pro rata share of 29.55% in the Vapi Unit. The Financial Creditor vide its letter dated August 31, 2015 bearing reference no. SASF/PCL/2015-16/306 rejected the revised settlement offer of the Corporate Debtor and requested to submit a substantially improved settlement proposal for their consideration. Even thereafter, several letters were issued by the Corporate Debtor seeking OTS with the Financial Creditor as latest as May 20, 2019, which was also rejected by the Financial Creditor vide letter dated July 06, 2019, which was also rejected by the Financial Creditor vide letter dated 06, 2019 bearing reference no. SASF/PCL/2019-20/479 without assigning any reasons whatsoever.

¶79

The Financial Creditor has filed further Addition Affidavit dated 01.01.2020 as the Financial Creditor was directed vide order dated 04.12.2019 to explain the process followed for approving the OTS. However, the Financial Creditor has submitted as under:

¶80

a) Vide letter dated 11.10.2007, the Financial Creditor sanctioned OTS proposal of Rs.4 crore plus 7 lakh shares. The Financial Creditor extended time to deposit cash component time to time upon request of the Corporate Debtor. However, despite granting sufficient opportunities, no payment received and therefore vide letter dated 24.09.2012 earlier OTS was revoked. The Corporate Debtor submitted and OTS proposal and the same offered being on lower

¶81

Page 8 of 19

¶82

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNALMUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶83

CP (IB) No. 2146/MB-IV/2019

¶84

side, OTS proposal were rejected vide letter dated 06.07.2016. The Corporate Debtor again approached SASF with the settlement proposal vide its letter dated 20.05.2019 proposing for negotiated settlement with repayment period over 18 months or assignment of debt to ARC under 15:85 structure which was rejected on 06.07.2019. Vide letter dated 01.11.2019, the Corporate Debtor submitted revised OTS proposal for Rs.11.46 crore. The said OTS proposal was put up before Competent Authority with process note. The process note was prepared on the basis of prevailing internal recovery policy of the Financial Creditor. The Competent Authority approved OTS subject to certain conditions with respect to upfront payment, filing of consent terms in pending DRT suit, payment of substantial amount before withdrawal of pending legal proceedings, etc. The settlement proposal of the Corporate Debtor was considered based on the prevailing recovery policy of the Financial Creditor which considered the value of securities available and the expected time for realisation and various other factors. No OTS sanction letter is issued to the Corporate Debtor since upfront amount as stated above was not paid. Pending compliance of the conditions as stated, the OTS has not come into effect. Process note, internal recovery policy and notes of Competent Authority for approval of OTS cannot be provided in court proceedings since those documents are confidential documents and the disclosure/production such confidential documents would affect the commercial and competent position of the Financial Creditor in other cases.

¶85

Page 9 of 19

¶86

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNALMUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶87

CP (IB) No. 2146/MB-IV/2019

¶88

b) After committing default, the Corporate Debtor immediately approached BIFR and reference under section 15(1) was registered in January, 2002. On 19.08.2004 BIFR admitted reference and on 21.09.2005. on 20.12.2011 Assets Sale Committee confirmed sale of Vapi Unit for Rs.360 lakh and the Financial Creditor received Rs.106.38 lakh out of total sale proceeds. The amount was kept in Escrow account since the Financial Creditor were not agreed with distribution and the distribution was challenged before AAIFR. After hearing the parties AAIFR vide order dated 18.01.2016 set aside order of distribution and reminded back the matter. Afterwards, the SICA act was repealed on 01.12.2016 and therefore SASF has already appropriated amount of Rs.106.38 lakh. From year 2004 onwards, the Corporate Debtor has categorically admitted claim of Financial Creditor in their balance audited Balance Sheets.

¶89

The Financial Creditor has filed Additional Affidavit dated 16.12.2020 and submitted as under:

¶90

a) Upon request of the Corporate Debtor, the Company was sanctioned OTS and Letter of Approval (LoA) was issued vide Letter dated 18.01.2020 to the Corporate Debtor. Accordingly, the Corporate Debtor was supposed to pay 8.25 crore in instalments as mentioned in the said OTS Letter.

¶91

b) Vide E-mail dated 16.04.2020 and 29.05.2020, the Corporate Debtor requested to SASF for granting the benefit of moratorium as declared by RBI for payment of amounts under the OTS sanctioned to the Company. In response, the SASF vide its letter dated 15.06.2020 advised the Company to pay the amount of Rs.20 lakh fallen due on

¶92

Page 10 of 19

¶93

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNALMUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶94

CP (IB) No. 2146/MB-IV/2019

¶95

19.03.2020 i.e. prior to the declaration of lockdown, together with the interest as above immediately.

¶96

c) The Corporate Debtor submitted the revised OTS proposal vide its letter dated 27.07.2020, requesting reschedulment of all instalments and also put various onerous conditions in revised letter. The OTS submitted by the Corporate Debtor was subject to complete relaxation of lockdown, resuming train services and various other things.

¶97

d) The Financial Creditor vide letter dated 05.08.2020 rejected the OTS granted on 18.01.2020 and also adjusted amount paid by the Corporate Debtor towards their outstanding dues. The Financial Creditor dated 06.10.2020 informed the Corporate Debtor that RBI circular on Covid-19 is not applicable to subject account since account was not standard account.

¶98

The Corporate Debtor has filed Affidavit in reply dated 19.08.2021 to the Additional Affidavit dated 16.12.2020 filed by the Financial Creditor and submits as under:

¶99

a) The Financial Creditor is ignoring the RBI Circular dated 27.03.2020 and 23.05.2020 granting moratorium to borrowers in the wake of Covid-19 pandemic.

¶100

b) The Financial Creditor on 18.01.2020 before the Adjudicating Authority had sanctioned the OTS and Letter of Approval was issued vide letter dated 18.01.2020 to the Corporate Debtor and entering for OTS, the Corporate Debtor had paid a down payment of Rs.0.82 crore and first instalment of Rs.0.20 crore on 18.02.2020. The second instalment was due on 18.03.2020. However, the second

¶101

Page 11 of 19

¶102

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNALMUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶103

CP (IB) No. 2146/MB-IV/2019

¶104

instalment could not be honoured due to bad market condition caused by Covid-19 pandemic. The Corporate Debtor also informed to the Financial Creditor vide its email dated 16.04.2020 that due to the lockdown imposed by the Government and to give ease to the business suffering the RBI had granted the moratorium vide its circular on 27.03.2020 which the Corporate Debtor was also eligible for to be granted.

¶105

c) The Financial Creditor replied to the Corporate Debtor vide its email dated 18.04.2020 stating that request for extension of time for payment of instalment will be examined by the Financial Creditor once the office start functioning normally and, in the meantime, proposed to deposit the cheque of Rs.20 lakh furnished towards second instalment. On 22.04.2020 the Managing Director of the Corporate Debtor informed the Financial Creditor to hold on and not to deposit the cheque till the lockdown ends.

¶106

d) The Corporate Debtor vide its email dated 12.06.2020 informed the Financial Creditor that the RBI granted a moratorium of another three months from 01.06.2020 to 31.08.2020 vide RBI Circular dated 23.05.2020. In view of the same, the request of the Financial Creditor to make payment of the instalment fallen due on 18.03.2020 would be against the spirit of the mandate under aforesaid RBI Circulars and the entire purpose of issuing these Circulars would get defeated.

¶107

Page 12 of 19

¶108

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNALMUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶109

CP (IB) No. 2146/MB-IV/2019

¶110

Findings/Observations:

¶111

We have heard the submissions of the counsel on both the sides and observed as under:

¶112

We have prudently gone through the pleadings available on record. The Financial Creditor has granted/sanctioned loan facility in following ways:

¶113

Sanctioned	Disbursed
Rs.700 lakh (First Loan) sanctioned on 03.08.1995	Rs.700 lakh disbursed on 04.08.1995
Rs.300 lakh (NCD Loan)	Rs.300 lakh disbursed on 02.02.1999
Sanctioned on 21.12.1998
Rs.1100 lakh (Second Loan) Sanctioned on 31.08.1999	Rs.1020 lakh disbursed on 06.11.1999

¶114

It is also observed by the Bench that the Corporate Debtor nowhere in the reply has disputed the claim amount nor denied the Loan Agreement entered between the parties. In view of the aforesaid, this Bench finds no reason to deny the admission of the Application filed by the Financial Creditor

¶115

It is also observed by the Bench that the Corporate Debtor has no intention of making the payment to Financial Creditor which is due and payable. With respect to the OTS proposal exchanged between the Financial Creditor and the Corporate Debtor, it is admitted fact that if

¶116

Page 13 of 19

¶117

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNALMUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶118

CP (IB) No. 2146/MB-IV/2019

¶119

the OTS proposal is not accepted by the Financial Creditor, the same is not in force.

¶120

It is also observed by the Bench that the Corporate Debtor has time and again acknowledged the liability through OTS proposal and letters to the Financial Creditor. The Corporate Debtor has sent last OTS letter dated 01.11.2019 to the Corporate Debtor which clearly shows the liability of the Corporate Debtor to pay the debt. The said OTS letter is as under:

¶121

Page 14 of 19

¶122

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNALMUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶123

CP (IB) No. 2146/MB-IV/2019

¶124

The Corporate Debtor is taking the shield of Covid-19 pandemic and the RBI Circular with respect to moratorium to borrowers in the wake of Covid-19 pandemic. However, this shows the intention of the Corporate Debtor not to make payment which due and payable to the Financial Creditor.

¶125

Page 15 of 19

¶126

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNALMUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶127

CP (IB) No. 2146/MB-IV/2019

¶128

In view of the above, this Bench finds no reason to deny the Petition under section 7 of the Code filed by the Financial Creditor to initiate the CIRP against the Corporate Debtor.

¶129

On perusal of the documents submitted by the Applicant, it is clear that financial debt amounting to more than Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) is due and payable by the Corporate Debtor to the Applicant. There is default by the Corporate Debtor in payment of debt amount.

¶130

The application is complete and has been filed under the proper form. The debt amount is more than Rupees One Lakh and debt and default of the Corporate Debtor has been established.

¶131

The Applicant has proposed the name of Mr. Ramnarayan Rajaraman, a registered insolvency resolution professional having Registration Number [IBBI/IPA-002/IP-N000699/2018-19/12204], as Interim Resolution Professional, to carry out the functions as mentioned under I&B Code and has also given his declaration that no disciplinary proceedings are pending against him

¶132

ORDER

¶133

This Application being C.P. (IB) No. 2146/MB/C-IV/2019 filed under Section 7 of I&B Code, 2016, presented by Stressed Assets Stabilization Fund, Financial Creditor/ Applicant against Precision Containers Limited, Corporate Debtor for initiating corporate insolvency resolution process is admitted. We further declare moratorium u/s 14 of I&B Code with consequential directions as mentioned below:

¶134

Page 16 of 19

¶135

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNALMUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶136

CP (IB) No. 2146/MB-IV/2019

¶137

I. That this Bench as a result of this prohibits:

¶138

a) the institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the corporate debtor including execution of any judgment, decree or order in any court of law, tribunal, arbitration panel or other authority;

¶139

b) transferring, encumbering, alienating or disposing of by the corporate debtor any of its assets or any legal right or beneficial interest therein;

¶140

c) any action to foreclose, recover or enforce any security interest created by the corporate debtor in respect of its property including any action under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002;

¶141

d) the recovery of any property by an owner or lessor where such property is occupied by or in possession of the corporate debtor.

¶142

II. That the supply of essential goods or services to the corporate debtor, if continuing, shall not be terminated or suspended or interrupted during the moratorium period.

¶143

III. That the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 14 of I&B Code shall not apply to

¶144

a. such transactions as may be notified by the Central Government in consultation with any financial sector regulator;

¶145

Page 17 of 19

¶146

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNALMUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶147

CP (IB) No. 2146/MB-IV/2019

¶148

b. a surety in a contract of guarantee to a Corporate Debtor.

¶149

IV. That the order of moratorium shall have effect from the date of this order till the completion of the corporate insolvency resolution process or until this Bench approves the resolution plan under subsection (1) of section 31 of I&B Code or passes an order for the liquidation of the corporate debtor under section 33 of I&B Code, as the case may be.

¶150

V. That the public announcement of the corporate insolvency resolution process shall be made immediately as specified under section 13 of I&B Code.

¶151

VI. That this Bench appoints Mr. Ramnarayan Rajaraman, a registered insolvency resolution professional having Registration Number: [IBBI/IPA-002/IP-N000699/2018-19/12204], Contact: 9867975681, E-mail: [email protected], as Interim Resolution Professional to carry out the functions as mentioned under I&B Code, the fee payable to IRP/RP shall comply with the IBBI Regulations/Circulars/Directions issued in this regard.

¶152

VII. The Financial Creditor shall deposit a sum of Rs.5,00,000/(Rupees five lakh only) with the IRP to meet the expenses arising out of issuing public notice and inviting claims. These expenses are subject to approval by the Committee of Creditors (CoC).

¶153

Page 18 of 19

¶154

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNALMUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶155

CP (IB) No. 2146/MB-IV/2019

¶156

The Registry is directed to immediately communicate this order to the Financial Creditor, the Corporate Debtor and the Interim Resolution Professional even by way of email or Whats App. Compliance report of the order by Designated Registrar is to be submitted today.

¶157

Sd/- Sd/Rajesh Sharma Suchitra Kanuparthi Member (Technical) Member (Judicial)

¶158

10.03.2022

¶159

Page 19 of 19

In the matter of Precision Containeurs Limited Cp (Ib) No. 2146-MB-IV-2019

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

In the matter of Precision Containeurs Limited Cp (Ib) No. 2146-MB-IV-2019

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases