Dismissed

In the matter of Cycus Technologies Pvt. Ltd. [Cp (Ib) No.3856-MB-IV-2019]

NCLT18 Jul 2023CP (IB) No.3856-MB-IV-2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The NCLT dismissed an application by an operational creditor seeking to initiate the CIRP against the Corporate Debtor. The Tribunal held the application not maintainable because the underlying debt was converted into a financial debt and the petition was motivated by internal disputes.

What did the court decide?

Application for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under Section 9 of the IBC was dismissed.

In the matter of Cycus Technologies Pvt. Ltd. [Cp (Ib)… — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | NCLT (2023)

¶1

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶2

CP (IB) No.3856/MB-IV/2019

¶3

Under Section 9 of the I&B Code, 2016

¶4

In the matter of:

¶5

Ashu Dutt

¶6

…Operational Creditor/Applicant

¶7

V/s.

¶8

Cycus Technologies Pvt. Ltd.

¶9

[CIN: U72900MH2001PTC131841]

¶10

... Corporate Debtor/Respondent

¶11

Order dated: 18.07.2023

¶12

Coram: Mr. Prabhat Kumar Mr. Kishore Vemulapalli Hon’ble Member (Technical) Hon’ble Member (Judicial) Appearances : For the Petitioner/ Intervenor : Mr. Santosh Paul, Ld. Sr. Counsel a/w Mr. Hubab Sayyed and Nidhi Faganiya, Adv. For the Corporate Debtor present.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Per: Kishore Vemulapalli, Member (Judicial)

¶15

This is a Company Petition is filed under section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) by Mr. Ashu Dutt (“the Operational Creditor”) seeking initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against M/s. Cycus Technologies Private Limited, (“the Corporate Debtor”).

¶16

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶17

CP (IB) No. 3854/MB-IV/2019

¶18

The Company Petition is filed on 31.10.2019 claiming an amount of Rs.1,19,17,18,178/in default (Principal of Rs. 1,09,33,19,430/- and Interest @18% p.a. till 30.09.2019 Rs. 9,83,98,748). The Part IV of Form 5 does not specify any specific date of default.

¶19

It is submitted by the Applicant that he is an investment banker/ finance author and Financial Markets Anchor of National fame. Corporate Debtor is engaged in business of Technology advisory/ consulting. The Applicant had executed 2 separate Secured Debt Agreements dated 11.12.2012 and 01.12.2014 with Corporation Debtor for payment of Rs.40.5 Crores. These, agreements were executed in lieu of inability of the Corporate Debtor to pay the compensation of the Applicant either in the form of shares or cash as per agreement dated 07.10.2008.

¶20

3.1. The amount was to be paid as per the agreements was Rs.40.5 Crores, due on 01.12.2015 any delay invited an interest of 18%. However, in spite of repeated reminders, the Corporate Debtor has not paid the amounts. The Applicant had raised several invoices amounting to Rs.1,19,17,18,178/-.

¶21

3.2. The Applicant made several follow ups for recovery of the outstanding amounts. However, Corporate Debtor failed to repay the same. Following thereon demand notice was also served on Corporate Debtor however; no payments were released by Corporate Debtor.

¶22

We heard the Counsel(s) and perused the material on record.

¶23

4.1. It is observed that the Applicant has filed this Application u/s 9 of the Code claiming default of Rs. 1,19,17,18,178/which represents amount of secured loan and interest accrued thereon till 30.09.2019 @ 18% p.a. compounded

¶24

Page 2 of 4

¶25

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶26

CP (IB) No. 3854/MB-IV/2019

¶27

annually. This secured loan came into existence on account of Corporate Debtor’s failure to issue 40.5 million shares or cash in lieu of the shares, whereupon the applicant is stated to have enter into security agreement dated 11.12.2012 and 01.12.2014. We feel that it is a case of conversion of operational debt (claim arising from value of stock options payable in cash) into financial debt vide agreement dated 30.09.2014. In other words, the agreement dated 30.09.2014 discharges the Corporate Debtor from the Operational debt by acknowledgement of liability of secured loan, which is a financial debt. In Application u/s 9 of the Code can be filed by Operational Creditor to whom an Operational debt is due by the Corporate Debtor. In the present case the Operational Debt stands discharged by conversion of said debt into the secured loan. Accordingly, no operational debt exists as on date of filing of the Application. Further, payment of interest on the said secured loan cannot be considered as Operational debt. Hence, the present Application filed u/s 9 of the Code is not maintainable in the absence of any operational debt being in existence.

¶28

4.2. From the perusal of case records with this Bench, it is noticed that there are 7 Petitions filed u/s 241 & 242 of the companies Act, 2013, including one petition pertaining to Corporate Debtor numbered as TP/94(MB)2015, are pending since year 2015 and these petitions pertain to allegation of operation mismanagement made by wife of the Applicant against him. Even, if it is considered that the amount claimed is an operational debt, as claimed by the Applicant, there exist a prior dispute raised by the other

¶29

Page 3 of 4

¶30

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH-IV

¶31

CP (IB) No. 3854/MB-IV/2019

¶32

shareholders in relation to affairs and management of the Corporate debtor by the Applicant himself.

¶33

In view of this also, this Application u/s 9 of the Code deserves to be dismissed as not maintainable on the ground that this Application is motivated from the dispute between the promoters and does not seek resolution of the Corporate Debtor.

¶34

ORDER

¶35

The Company Petition bearing CP(IB) 3856/MB-IV/2019 filed by Mr. Ashu Dutt, (“the Operational Creditor”), under section 9 of the IBC read with rule 4(1) of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Cycus Technologies Private Limited (“the Corporate Debtor”) (“the Corporate Debtor) is dismissed .

¶36

Sd/- Sd/- Prabhat Kumar Kishore Vemulapalli Member (Technical) Member (Judicial)

¶37

Dubey/

¶38

Page 4 of 4

In the matter of Cycus Technologies Pvt. Ltd. [Cp (Ib) No.3856-MB-IV-2019]

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

In the matter of Cycus Technologies Pvt. Ltd. [Cp (Ib) No.3856-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