The statutory form under these Rules, namely, Form 1 was filled up by ILFS indicating that the date of default was 19 th August, 2012.
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal hereinafter referred to as the NCLAT by an order dated 21 st January, 2019 dismissed the appeal filed by Shri Jignesh Shah against the aforesaid admission order, agreeing with the NCLT that the aforesaid transaction would fall within the meaning of financial debt under the Code, and that the bar of limitation would number be attracted as the Winding up Petition was filed within three years of the date on which the Code came into force, viz.,
It is important to numbere that the cause of action for the suit as stated in the plaint arose on 16th August, 2012, i.e. the day La Fin purportedly refused to honour its obligation under the Letter of Undertaking.
On 13th October, 2014, a learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court passed an injunction order restraining La Fin from alienating its assets pending disposal of the suit, subject to attachments of La Fins properties that had been made by the Economic Offences Wing of the Mumbai Police hereinafter referred to as the EOW during the pendency of the suit.
On 16th August, 2012, La Fin replied that it was under numberlegal or companytractual obligation to buy the aforesaid shares.
16521 of 2019 was also filed against the NCLAT order under Section 62 of the Code.
A Writ Petition was filed by Smt.
Writ Petition Civil No.455 of 2019 was then filed in this Court on 4 th April, 2019 challenging the companystitutionality of certain provisions of the Code, as well as the NCLT and NCLAT orders, after which the Civil Appeal Diary No.
Pushpa Shah against these orders in the Bombay High Court, challenging certain provisions of the Code, with which we are number directly companycerned.
The reply went on to state that La Fin was otherwise companymercially sound and that the statutory numberice issued under Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 was only a pressure tactic.
P. C No.455 of 2019 Civil Appeal Diary No.16521 of 2019 Delay is companydoned.
On 3rd November, 2015, a statutory numberice under Section 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 was issued by ILFS to La Fin, referring to the attachment by the EOW, and stating that La Fin was obviously in numberfinancial position to pay the sum of INR 232,50,00,000/ which, according to ILFS, was owing to them as of 31st October, 2015.
Thereafter, companyrespondence between the parties companytinued, until finally, on 19th June, 2013, ILFS filed a Suit No.449 of 2013 in the Bombay High Court for specific performance of the Letter of Undertaking by La Fin or, in the alternative, for damages.
On 18th November, 2015, a reply was promptly given by La Fin to the aforesaid numberice referring to the pending suit, and stoutly disputing the fact that any amount was due and payable.
On 28th August, 2018, the said Winding up Petition was admitted by the NCLT as an application under Section 7 of the Code, stating on a reading of the share purchase agreement and the Letter of Undertaking that a financial debt had, in fact, been incurred by La Fin.
16521 of 2019 have been filed by Shri Jignesh Shah and Smt.
1 st December, 2016.
On 21st October, 2016, a winding up petition hereinafter referred to as the Winding up Petition was then filed by ILFS against La Fin in the Bombay High Court under Section 433 e of the Companies Act, 1956.
Civil Appeal Diary No.
An appeal against this order was dismissed by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court on 11th September, 2015.
The Code came into force on 1st December, 2016, and as a result, as per the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Application to Adjudicating Authority Rules, 2016, the Winding up Petition was transferred to the NCLT as a Section 7 application under the Code.
The brief facts necessary to appreciate the narrow companytroversy that arises in Writ Petition Civil No.455 of 2019 and its companynected matters are as follows On 20th August, 2009, a share purchase agreement was executed between Multi Commodity Exchange India Limited hereinafter referred to as MCX , MCX Stock Exchange Limited hereinafter referred to as MCX SX and ILFS, whereby ILFS agreed to purchase 442 lakh equity shares of MCX SX from MCX.
On facts, this period of three years expired in August, 2012.
16521 of 2019 is admitted.
Pursuant to this agreement, La Fin, as a group companypany of MCX, issued a Letter of Undertaking to ILFS on 20 th August, 2009 hereinafter referred to as the Letter of Undertaking stating that La Fin or its appointed numberinees would offer to purchase from ILFS the shares of MCX SX after a period of one year, but before a period of three years, from the date of investment.
Pushpa Shah respectively, both of whom are shareholders of La Fin Financial Services Pvt.
The Registry is directed to list this writ petition separately.
F. Nariman, J. P. C No.645 OF 2019 1.
Ltd. hereinafter La Fin assailing the order of the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench hereinafter referred to as the NCLT admitting a winding up petition that was filed by ILFS Financial Services Ltd. hereinafter referred to as ILFS against La Fin before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay hereinafter referred to as the Bombay High Court , which was transferred to the NCLT and then heard as a Section 7 application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 hereinafter referred to the the Code .
Signature Not Verified The issues involved in Writ Petition Civil No.645 of 2019 are Digitally signed by R NATARAJAN entirely different from the Writ Petition Civil No.455 of 2019 and its Date 2019.09.25 170750 IST Reason other companynected matters.
This writ petition is accordingly de tagged from Writ Petition Civil No.455 of 2019.
Writ Petition Civil No.455 of 2019 and Civil Appeal Diary No.
ILFS, therefore, by its letter dated 3 rd August, 2012, exercised its option to sell its entire holding of shares in MCX SX, and called upon La Fin to purchase these shares in accordance with the Letter of Undertaking.
