Case Law Details
BSE Ltd. Vs Asahi Infrastructure & Projects Ltd. (NCLAT Delhi)
Conclusion: Since assessee had initiated the insolvency proceedings against the Corporate Debtor only as a recovery mechanism to recover dues of ‘listing fees’ however, IB Code was not meant for recovery of dues of creditors.
Held: Assessee-Bombay Stock Exchange Limited (for short ‘BSE’) filed an Application under Section 9 of the IB Code against the Respondent (Corporate Debtor) claiming an amount of Rs.8,85,526/- as on 1st April, 2017 as Operational Creditor. The case of assessee was that Corporate Debtor defaulted in making payment of listing fees as per Clause 38 of the Listing Agreement. Invoice dated 1st April, 2017 for an amount of Rs.8,85,526 for the Annual Listing Fees payable for the year 2017-18 and arrears payable upto 2016-17 was demanded. The Corporate Debtor opposed the Application and prayed that the same might be dismissed at the threshold on the ground of maintainability. The defence of the Corporate Debtor was that listing fees, which was claimed by the Operational Creditor was not an operational debt but a fee payable in pursuance to Regulation 14 of SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015. It was held that assessee had initiated the insolvency proceedings against the Corporate Debtor only as a recovery mechanism to recover dues of ‘listing fees’. IB Code was not meant for recovery of dues of creditors. Therefore, Adjudicating Authority did not commit any error in rejecting the Application under Section 9 filed by assessee.
FULL TEXT OF THE NCLAT JUDGMENT/ORDER
This Appeal has been filed under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IB Code’), challenging the order dated 11.02.2019 passed by National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench in CP No.1718/IBC/NCLT/MB/MAH/2017 & MA 216/2018.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
