# In the matter of Tapstia Industrial Micro Estate Landmark Auto Engineering Consortium Ltd. CP-91(CHE)-2021

> NCLT judgment dated 2021-11-17. Citation: TCN-2021-NCLT-00470. The case involves an application filed by R. Kamala, the Financial Creditor, under Section 7 of…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 17 Nov 2021
- **Citation:** TCN-2021-NCLT-00470
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-chandigarh/tapstia-industrial-micro-estate-landmark-auto-engineering-consortium-ltd-cp-91ch-b7b81d50

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an application filed by R. Kamala, the Financial Creditor, under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against TAPSTIA Industrial Micro Estate Landmark Auto Engineering Consortium Limited, the Corporate Debtor. The Financial Creditor had conveyed an immovable property to the Corporate Debtor, and a loan agreement was made for Rs.3,90,00,000/- due to a shortfall in the sale consideration, repayable by 30.03.2017 with 24% interest. A Demand Promissory Note was executed on 29.11.2016. The Corporate Debtor failed to make payments, except for Rs.43,68,000/- towards interest. The Financial Creditor served a notice on 28.07.2018, claiming Rs.5,20,02,679/-. An earlier application,

…

## Facts

R. Kamala, the Financial Creditor, provided an immovable property to TAPSTIA Industrial Micro Estate Landmark Auto Engineering Consortium Limited, the Corporate Debtor. Due to a shortfall in the sale consideration, a loan agreement for Rs.3,90,00,000/- was established, with repayment due by 30.03.2017 at 24% interest. A Demand Promissory Note was executed on 29.11.2016. The Corporate Debtor defaulted on payments, except for Rs.43,68,000/- towards interest. A notice was served on 28.07.2018, claiming Rs.5,20,02,679/-. An earlier application, IBA/86/2019, was withdrawn following a Memorandum of Compromise on 30.10.2019, where the Corporate Debtor paid Rs.39,00,000/-. The Corporate Debtor failed to adhere to the compromise terms, leading to a new application under Section

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the application filed by the Financial Creditor under Section 7 of IBC, 2016, against the …

**Ratio:** Section 10A of the IBC, 2016, imposes a statutory bar on filing applications under

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLT reasoned that the Corporate Debtor had already accepted its default in the

…

**Interpretation:** The court interpreted Section 10A to prevent the initiation of CIRP for

…

**Application:** The NCLT applied the ratio to the facts by noting that the Corporate Debtor's

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Sucharit…; Anil Ku…
- **Appellants:** R. Ka…
- **Respondents:** TAPSTIA Industrial…; M/s. TAPSTIA…

## Timeline

- **2016-11-29 — Demand Promissory Note…**: A Demand Promissory Note was…
- **2017-03-30 — Repayment D…**: The loan of Rs.3,90,00,000/- was to be…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 14 — Moratorium](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-14)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-chandigarh/tapstia-industrial-micro-estate-landmark-auto-engineering-consortium-ltd-cp-91ch-b7b81d50