Case Law Details
Aashish Kadam Vs Nagpur Nagarik Sahakari Bank Ltd. (NCLAT Delhi)
The submission which has been raised by Shri Shikhil Suri is that the document by which Secured Cash Credit Facility was extended to the Corporate Debtor is not a stamped and on account of document having not been stamped, the said document could not have been relied on in passing of the order in Application under Section 7.
We have perused the impugned order. In para 7 of the impugned order, document executed by the Corporate Debtor has been noticed. One of the facts which has been noticed is that present is a case of mortgage by deposit of title deed. Even if the facility agreement was not stamped, there was other materials on the record which clearly prove the financial debt which was owed by the Appellant, hence, we do not find any error in the order of the Adjudicating Authority admitting the Application under Section 7.
FULL TEXT OF THE NCLAT JUDGMENT/ORDER
This Appeal has been filed against the order dated 15.03.2022 passed in C.P No.73/(IB)-MB-V/2021 by which order the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Mumbai Bench, has admitted the Application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code” for short) filed by the Financial Creditor-‘Nagpur Nagarik Sahakari Bank Ltd.’.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
