A.K Corporation, a sole proprietorship, filed a petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, against Anupam Extractions Limited, the Corporate Debtor, for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The petition was filed on 18th July 2018, claiming a total default of ₹74,33,697.94 as of 31st March 2018. The petitioner had granted and disbursed a loan to the corporate debtor between 24.05.2006 and 31.03.2007.
A.K Corporation, a sole proprietorship, claimed a default of ₹74,33,697.94 (including interest) as of 31.03.2018 from Anupam Extractions Limited. The principal amount of ₹26,80,666/- was disbursed as a loan between 24.05.2006 and 31.03.2007. The Petitioner, Mr. Ashok B. Saraf, was a Director in the Respondent Company until 12.03.2008. The loan was reflected as 'Unsecured Loan from Director' and later as 'Loans from Shareholders' in the Respondent's audited accounts. The Respondent admitted the debt but claimed it was withheld due to malpractices by the Petitioner during his tenure as a director. The Respondent also argued that the petition was barred by limitation and that there was no instrument executed between the parties. The Petitioner sought repayment of the loan
…Sign in to view the parties.
Petitioner started…
Petitioner co…
A.K Corporation, a sole proprietorship, filed a petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, against Anupam Extractions Limited, the Corporate Debtor, for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The petition was filed on 18th July 2018, claiming a total default of ₹74,33,697.94 as of 31st March 2018. The petitioner had granted and disbursed a loan to the corporate debtor between 24.05.2006 and 31.03.2007.
A.K Corporation, a sole proprietorship, claimed a default of ₹74,33,697.94 (including interest) as of 31.03.2018 from Anupam Extractions Limited. The principal amount of ₹26,80,666/- was disbursed as a loan between 24.05.2006 and 31.03.2007. The Petitioner, Mr. Ashok B. Saraf, was a Director in the Respondent Company until 12.03.2008. The loan was reflected as 'Unsecured Loan from Director' and later as 'Loans from Shareholders' in the Respondent's audited accounts. The Respondent admitted the debt but claimed it was withheld due to malpractices by the Petitioner during his tenure as a director. The Respondent also argued that the petition was barred by limitation and that there was no instrument executed between the parties. The Petitioner sought repayment of the loan
…Petitioner started…
Petitioner co…