28.We have thoughtfully considered the aforesaid contentions raised by the Counsel for the Corporate Debtor and have also carefully gone through the judgment cited by the Counsel for the Corporate Debtor. No doubt, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has unequivocally held that all documents which are insufficiently stamped and do not strictly comply with the provisions of the Stamp Act, are to be treated as inadmissible in evidence and are therefore unenforceable unless and until the remedy provided in the Stamp Act itself is resorted to cure the defect of insufficient stamping, such documents should not be pressed into service to enforce the rights of the parties under such defective agreement/document. However, in our considered view, in the context of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, the law laid down by the Supreme Court in N N Global’s case (supra) cannot be said to be applicable. Proceedings u/s 7 or for that matter u/s 9 of the Code are not recovery proceedings. In fact, the object of the entire Code is to resolve the distressed Corporate Debtors. This Authority is not envisaged to ascertain the liability of the Corporate Debtor on the basis of loan or security agreements and other documents executed by the Corporate Debtor or its Guarantors. Therefore, the admissibility of such document is not supposed to be under challenge or question before this Authority while dealing with Application u/s 7 or 9 of the Code. It is equally true that the preceding u/s 7 are not akin to some recovery suit or proceedings wherein the liability of the Corporate Debtor on the basis of loan or other documents executed by it is to be ascertained. Therefore, inadequacy of any document in terms of requirement of the Stamp Act, in our considered view, cannot be made a ground to nonsuit the Petitioner in an Application u/s 7 of the Code. Rather, in such proceedings, this Authority has simply to arrive at a conclusion that the Corporate Debtor has not been able to repay its debts of more than Rs.
