NCLT Has Discretion To Not Admit Financial Creditor's CIRP Application Even If Corporate Debtor Is In Default : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that it is not mandatory for the Adjudicating Authority to admit an application to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process even if a debt existed and the Corporate debtor is in default.However, such discretionary power cannot be exercised arbitrarily or capriciously, the bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and JK Maheshwari cautioned.The court observed that, ordinarily, the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) would have to exercise its discretion to admit and initiate CIRP on satisfaction of the existence of a financial debt and default on the part of the Corporate Debtor in payment of the debt, unless there are good reasons not to admit the petition.Section 7(5) IBCUnder, Section 7(5), where the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) is satisfied that a default has occurred and the application under sub-Section (2) of the IBC is complete and there is no disciplinary proceeding against the proposed Resolution Professional, it may by order, admit such application. If default has not occurred, or the application is incomplete, or any disciplinary proceeding is pending against the proposed Resolution Professional, the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) may reject such application in terms of Section 7(5)(a) of the IBC, but after giving the applicant opportunity to rectify the defect.BackgroundIn this case, the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) and the Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) proceeded on the premises that an application must necessarily be entertained under Section 7(5)(a) of the IBC, if a debt existed and the Corporate Debtor was in default of payment of debt. In other words, the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) found Section 7(5) (a) of the IBC to be mandatory. Before the Apex Court, it was contended that the Legislature, in its wisdom, has chosen to use the expression "may" in Section 7(5)(a) of the IBC and therefore the provision is directory.The issue therefore considered in the appeal was whether Section 7(5)(a) is a mandatory or a discretionary provision?The Adjudicating Authority may in its discretion not admit the application of a Financial CreditorThe bench noted that the expression 'shall' is used in the otherwise almost identical provision of Section 9(5) of the IBC relating to the initiation of CIRP by an Operational Creditor. The court, therefore, said:"The fact that Legislature used 'may' in Section 7(5)(a) of the IBC but a different word, that is, 'shall' in the otherwise almost identical provision of Section 9(5)(a) shows that 'may' and 'shall' in the two provisions are intended to convey a different meaning. It is apparent that Legislature intended Section 9(5)(a) of the IBC to be mandatory and Section 7(5)(a) of the IBC to be discretionary. An application of an Operational Creditor for initiation of CIRP under Section 9(2) of the IBC is mandatorily required to be admitted if the application is complete in all respects and in compliance of the requisites of the IBC and the rules and regulations thereunder, there is no payment of the unpaid operational debt, if notices for payment or the invoice has been delivered to the Corporate Debtor by the Operational Creditor and no notice of dispute has been received by the Operational Creditor. The IBC does not countenance dishonesty or deliberate failure to repay the dues of an operational creditor.. .....On the other hand, in the case of an application by a Financial Creditor who might even initiate proceedings in a representative capacity on behalf of all financial creditors, the Adjudicating Authority might examine the expedience of initiation of CIRP, taking into account all relevant facts and circumstances, including the overall financial health and viability of the Corporate Debtor. The Adjudicating Authority may in its discretion not admit the application of a Financial Creditor."Even though Section 7 (5)(a) of the IBC may confer discretionary power on the Adjudicating Authority, such discretionary power cannot be exercised arbitrarily or capriciously. In this regard, the bench observed:Ordinarily, the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) would have to exercise its discretion to admit an application under Section 7 of the IBC of the IBC and initiate CIRP on satisfaction of the existence of a financial debt and default on the part of the Corporate Debtor in payment of the debt, unless there are good reasons not to admit the petition.. The Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) has to consider the grounds made out by the Corporate Debtor against admission, on its own merits. For example when admission is opposed on the ground of existence of an award or a decree in favour of the Corporate Debtor, and the Awarded/decretal amount exceeds the amount of the debt, the Adjudicating Authority would have to exercise its discretion under Section 7(5)(a) of the IBC to keep the admission of the application of the Financial Creditor in abeyance, unless there is good reason not to do so. The Adjudicating Authority may, for example, admit the application of...

NCLT Has Discretion To Not Admit Financial Creditor's CIRP Application Even If Corporate Debtor Is In Default : Supreme Court

Ashok KM

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

NCLT Has Discretion To Not Admit Financial Creditor's CIRP Application Even If Corporate Debtor Is In Default : Supreme Court

Ashok KM

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers