The Preamble to the IBC expressly recognizes the shift in the law, with respect to ordering priority of claims, especially with respect to government dues:
“An Act to consolidate and amend the laws relating to reorganization and insolvency resolution of corporate persons, partnership firms and individuals in a time bound manner for maximization of value of assets of such persons, to promote entrepreneurship, availability of credit and balance the interests of the stakeholders including alteration in the order of priority of payment of Government dues and to establish an Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India, and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.”
The Preamble of the I&B Code, 2016 reads as follows:
"An Act to consolidate and amend the laws relating to reorganisation and insolvency resolution of corporate persons, partnership firms and individuals in a time bound manner for maximisation of value of assets of such persons, to promote entrepreneurship, availability of credit and balance the interests of all the stakeholders including alteration in the order of priority of payment of Government dues and to establish an Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India, and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. BE it enacted by Parliament in the Sixty-seventh Year of the Republic of India."
Hon’ble Apex Court in Swiss Ribbon Pvt Ltd v. union of India [(2019) 4 SCC 17, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 99 of 2018] has held that:
# Para 9…….The objective of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2015 is to consolidate and amend the laws relating to reorganization and insolvency resolution of corporate persons, partnership firms and individuals in a time-bound manner for maximization of value of assets of such persons, to promote entrepreneurship, availability of credit and balance the interests of all the stakeholders including alteration in the priority of payment of government dues and to establish an Insolvency and Bankruptcy Fund, and matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. An effective legal framework for timely resolution of insolvency and bankruptcy would support development of credit markets and encourage entrepreneurship. It would also improve Ease of Doing Business, and facilitate more investments leading to higher economic growth and development.
# Para 10 – The Preamble of the Code states as follows: ―An Act to consolidate and amend the laws relating to reorganization and insolvency resolution of corporate persons, partnership firms and individuals in a time bound manner for maximization of value of assets of such persons, to promote entrepreneurship, availability of credit and balance the interests of all the stakeholders including alteration in the order of priority of payment of Government dues and to establish an Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India, and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.
# Para 12. It can thus be seen that the primary focus of the legislation is to ensure revival and continuation of the corporate debtor by protecting the corporate debtor from its own management and from a corporate death by liquidation. The Code is thus a beneficial legislation which puts the corporate debtor back on its feet, not being a mere recovery legislation for creditors. The interests of the corporate debtor have, therefore, been bifurcated and separated from that of its promoters / those who are in management. Thus, the resolution process is not adversarial to the corporate debtor but, in fact, protective of its interests. The moratorium imposed by Section 14 is in the interest of the corporate debtor itself, thereby preserving the assets of the corporate debtor during the resolution process. The timelines within which the resolution process is to take place again protects the corporate debtor‘s assets from further dilution, and also protects all its creditors and workers by seeing that the resolution process goes through as fast as possible so that another management can, through its entrepreneurial skills, resuscitate the corporate debtor to achieve all these ends.
# Para 28. Most importantly, financial creditors are, from the very beginning, involved with assessing the viability of the corporate debtor. They can, and therefore do, engage in restructuring of the loan as well as reorganization of the corporate debtor’s business when there is financial stress, which are things operational creditors do not and cannot do. Thus, preserving the corporate debtor as a going concern, while ensuring maximum recovery for all creditors being the objective of the Code, financial creditors are clearly different from operational creditors and therefore, there is obviously an intelligible differentia between the two which has a direct relation to the objects sought to be achieved by the Code.” (Emphasis Added)
-------------------------------------------
THE PREVENTION OF MONEY-LAUNDERING ACT, 2002
“An Act to prevent money-laundering and to provide for confiscation of property derived from, or involved in, money-laundering and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.”
The legislative intent to the promulgation of the PMLA was categorically spelt out by the Hon’ble Apex Court in its judgment Vijay Madanlal Choudhury v. Union of India reported in 2022 SCC OnLine 929: MANU/SC/0924/2022, Paras 23, 43 and 44, whereof would be as under:
“23. […] Even the Preamble of the Act reinforces the background in which the Act has been enacted by the Parliament being commitment of the country to the international community. It is crystal clear from the Preamble that the Act has been enacted to prevent money laundering and to provide for confiscation of property derived from or involved in money-laundering and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. It is neither a pure regulatory legislation nor a pure penal legislation. It is amalgam of several facets essential to address the scourge of money-laundering as such. In one sense, it is a sui generis legislation.”
Xxx xxx xxx
“43. Needless to mention that such process or activity can be indulged in only after the property is derived or obtained as a result of criminal activity (a scheduled offence). It would be an offence of moneylaundering to indulge in or to assist or being party to the process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime; and such process or activity in a given fact situation may be a continuing offence, irrespective of the date and time of commission of the scheduled offence. In other words, the criminal activity may have been committed before the same had been notified as scheduled offence for the purpose of the 2002 Act, but if a person has indulged in or continues to indulge directly or indirectly in dealing with proceeds of crime, derived or obtained from such criminal activity even after it has been notified as scheduled offence, may be liable to be prosecuted for offence of money-laundering under the 2002 Act -- for continuing to possess or conceal the proceeds of crime (fully or in part) or retaining possession thereof or uses it in trenches until fully exhausted. The offence of money-laundering is not dependent on or linked to the date on which the scheduled offence or if we may say so the predicate offence has been committed. The relevant date is the date on which the person indulges in the process or activity connected with such proceeds of crime. These ingredients are intrinsic in the original provision (Section 3, as amended until 2013 and were in force till 31.7.2019); and the same has been merely explained and clarified by way of Explanation vide Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019. Thus understood, inclusion of Clause (ii) in Explanation inserted in 2019 is of no consequence as it does not alter or enlarge the scope of Section 3 at all.
44. As mentioned earlier, the rudimentary understanding of 'money-laundering' is that there are three generally accepted stages to moneylaundering, they are:
(a) Placement: which is to move the funds from direct association of the crime.
(b) Layering: which is disguising the trail to foil pursuit.
(c) Integration: which is making the money available to the criminal from what seem to be legitimate sources.” (Emphasis Added)
--------------------------------------------
SARFAESI
The Preamble of the Act states:
The financial sector has been one of the key drivers in India’s efforts to achieve success in rapidly developing its economy. While the banking industry in India is progressively complying with the international prudential norms and accounting practices, there are certain areas in which the banking and financial sector do not have a level playing field as compared to other participants in the financial markets in the world. There is no legal provision for facilitating securitisation of financial assets of banks and financial institutions. Further, unlike international banks, the banks and financial institutions in India do not have power to take possession of securities and sell them. Our existing legal framework relating to commercial transactions has not kept pace with the changing commercial practices and financial sector reforms. This has resulted in slow pace of recovery of defaulting loans and mounting levels of non-performing assets of banks and financial institutions. All these factors culminated into enactment of promulgation of New Law known as Securitisation & Reconstruction of Financial Assets & Enforcement of Security Interest,2002. As one can appreciates that basic idea of Government is Securitisation of Financial Asset & Reconstruction and if it fails then & only then Enforcement of Security Interest. The Act is popularly known as Securitisation Act or SARFAESI Act.
The provisions of the Act would enable banks and financial institutions to realise long-term assets, manage problem of liquidity, asset liability mismatches and improve recovery by exercising powers to take possessions of securities, sell them and reduce non-performing assets by adopting measures for recovery or reconstruction.
SARFAESI - Statement of Objects and Reasons
The financial sector has been one of the key drivers in India’s efforts to achieve success in rapidly developing its economy. While the banking industry in India is progressively complying with the international prudential norms and accounting practices, there are certain areas in which the banking and financial sector do not have a level playing field as compared to other participants in the financial markets in the world. There is no legal provision for facilitating securitisation of financial assets of banks and financial institutions. Further, unlike international banks, the banks and financial institutions in India do not have power to take possession of securities and sell them. Our existing legal framework relating to commercial transactions has not kept pace with the changing commercial practices and financial sector reforms. This has resulted in slow pace of recovery of defaulting loans and mounting levels of nonperforming assets of banks and financial institutions. Narasimham Committee I and II and Andhyarujina Committee constituted by the Central Government for the purpose of examining banking sector reforms have considered the need for changes in the legal system in respect of these areas. These Committees, inter alia, have suggested enactment of a new legislation for securitisation and empowering banks and financial institutions to take possession of the securities and to sell them without the intervention of the court. Acting on these suggestions, the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Ordinance, 2002 was promulgated on the 21st June, 2002 to regulate securitisation and reconstruction of financial assets and enforcement of security interest and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The provisions of the Ordinance would enable the banks and financial institutions to realize long-term assets, manage problem of liquidity, asset liability mismatches and improve recovery by exercising powers to take possession of securities, sell them and reduce non-performing assets by adopting measures for recovery or reconstruction. It is now proposed to replace the Ordinance by a Bill, which, inter alia, contains provisions of the Ordinance to provide for –
(a) Registration and regulation of securitisation companies or reconstruction companies by the Reserve Bank of India;
(b) facilitating securitisation of financial assets of banks and financial institutions with or without the benefit of underlying securities;
(c) Facilitating easy transferability of financial assets by the securitisation company or reconstruction company to acquire financial assets of banks and financial institutions by issue of debentures or bonds or any other security in the nature of a debenture;
(d) Empowering securitisation companies or reconstruction companies to raise funds by issue of security receipts to qualified institutional buyers;
(e) Facilitating reconstruction of financial assets acquired by exercising powers of enforcement of securities or change of management or other powers which are proposed to be conferred on the banks and financial institutions;
(f) Declaration of any securitisation company or reconstruction company registered with the Reserve Bank of India as a public financial institution for the purpose of section 4A of the Companies Act, 1956;
(g) Defining ‘security interest’ as any type of security including mortgage and change on immovable properties given for due repayment of any financial assistance given by any bank or financial institution;
(h) Empowering banks and financial institutions to take possession of securities given for financial assistance and sell or lease the same or takeover management in the event of default, i.e., classification of the borrower’s account as non-performing asset in accordance with the directions given or under guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank of India from time to time;
(i) The rights of a secured creditor to be exercised by one or more of its officers authorized in this behalf in accordance with the rules made by the Central Government;
(j) An appeal against the action of any bank or financial institution to the concerned Debts Recovery Tribunal and a second appeal to the Appellate Debts Recovery Tribunal;
(k) Setting up or causing to be set up a Central Registry by the Central Government for the purpose of registration of transactions relating to securitisation, asset reconstruction and creation of security interest;
(l) Application of the proposed legislation initially to banks and financial institutions and empowerment of the Central Government to extend the application of the proposed legislation to non-banking financial companies and other entities;
(m) Non-application of the proposed legislation to security interests in agricultural lands, loans not exceeding rupees one lakh and cases where eighty per cent, of the loans are repaid by the borrower. The Bill seeks to achieve the above objects.”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment