Rohit Suri Vs Rajasthan Financial Corporation (NCLAT Delhi)
NCLAT Delhi held that initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) for failure to honour repayment obligation justified since application filed within limitation period. Accordingly, present appeal dismissed.
Facts- The Respondent No. 1, registered under the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951, sanctioned a loan of ₹3.50 Crores to the Corporate Debtor in July 2009 and signed loan agreement, disbursing ₹2.40 Crores on 17.07.2009. The loan was repayable in 19 Equal Quarterly Instalments (EQIs) of ₹18.67 Lakhs each, after a six-month moratorium, with the first EQI due on or after 16.01.2010. However, during the moratorium period itself, on 13.01.2010, the Respondent No. 1 issued a demand notice u/s. 30 of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 claiming that the first EQI had become due and defaulted, and subsequently recalled the entire loan amount along with interest of ₹15.32 Lakhs.
The Respondent No. 1 took physical possession of the mortgaged property u/s. 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 and later issued an auction notice for 16.06.2010. This auction notice was challenged by several homebuyers/allottees before the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court via Writ Petition No. 7116/2010, resulting in an ex-parte stay order on auction proceedings dated 26.05.2010. Despite directions from the Hon’ble High Court to consider settlement proposals submitted by the Corporate Debtor on multiple occasions, the Respondent No. 1 rejected these proposals outright without consideration and failed to initiate any recovery proceedings within the limitation period under applicable laws, leading to the present dispute regarding limitation in initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).
