Shreesha Merla JUDGMENT
Bansi Lal Bhat, J. (Member (J))
1. The twin appeals preferred by the same 'Financial Creditor' viz 'Allahabad Bank' against two different 'Corporate Debtors' primarily assail the orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Mumbai Bench, Mumbai on 16th October, 2019 in MA 627/2019 & MA 3067/2019 in C.P.(IB)-3631(MB)/2018. The impugned orders have been assailed through the medium of the instant appeals by the 'Financial Creditor' contending that the Adjudicating Authority has, apart from giving a go by to the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("I&B Code" for short), also failed to follow the dictum of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in "Innoventive Industries Limited v. ICICI Bank and Anr.-MANU/SC/1063/2017 : (2018) 1 SCC 407".
2. Company Petition(IB)-3631(MB)/2018 and Company Petition(IB)-3621(MB)/2018 are the applications filed under Section 7 by the Appellant- 'Financial Creditor' against Respondents- 'Corporate Debtors' in the two appeals praying for initiation of 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process' on the ground that the 'Corporate Debtors' had committed default qua the financial debt that was payable in law and in fact to the 'Financial Creditor'. As some objections were raised on behalf of the 'Corporate Debtors' that the 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process' had been initiated fraudulently and with a malicious intent to drag a solvent corporate who was willing to pay amounts that were actually due and payable legally, the Adjudicating Authority, being of the view that during the entire loan process due diligence was not carried out, appointed PWC Mr. Gaganpreet Singh Puri, Pricewater House Coopers Services LLP as Forensic Auditor to examine allegations raised by the 'Corporate Debtor' and submit an Independent Report delineating some factual aspects bearing upon utilisation of the credit facility extended by the 'Financial Creditor' to 'Corporate Debtor'. The impugned orders appear to have been passed at the instance of 'Corporate Debtor' who had moved applications under Section 75 of the 'I&B Code' alleging false information having been furnished in the applications.
3. The applications under Section 7 of the 'I&B Code' appear to have been filed by the 'Financial Creditor' on 5th September, 2018 and the matter was pending consideration before the Adjudicating Authority since 18th September, 2019. However, instead of admitting or rejecting the application, the Adjudicating Authority proceeded to pass the impugned order which has been assailed through the medium of instant appeals.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
5. The question for consideration is whether the Adjudicating Authority was justified in ignoring the time frame prescribed under Section 7 of the 'I&B Code' and embarking upon an enquiry to determine whether the applications filed under Section 7 contained false information, when the matters were at the very threshold stage.
6. 'I&B Code' inter alia, consolidates and amends the law relating to insolvency resolution of corporate persons in a time bound manne........