Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + Tri Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2018 (12) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (12) TMI 1124 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, CHENNAICorporate insolvency proceedings - decision taken by the Lenders for removing the Resolution Professional at the expiry of the CIRP - Held that:- If the provisions of Section 33 of the I&B Code, 2016 are taken into consideration, the prayer can only be made for passing an Order for liquidation of the Corporate Debtor viz., M/s. Oceanic Tropical Fruits Pvt. Ltd. The Applicants, who are the lenders, have prayed to replace the Resolution Professional under the abovestated provisions of law in terms of meeting held on 03.09.2018 among SBI, CBI and ICICI Bank Ltd., having 100% of voting share with a further direction to him to hand over income and expenditure details incurred during CIRP period as duly approved by CoCs and consequently appoint Mr. P.R. Raman (RP) after excluding the time period consumed by the 1st Respondent (RP) in order to complete CIR Process within the time frame limit as mandated under the provision of I&B Code, 2016 and pass such further or other orders as deemed fit and proper and thus render justice. However, this Application has been filed after expiry of the maximum period of CIRP as provided under Section 12 of the I&B Code, 2016, which is not falling within the purview of the provisions of the Code, and is not maintainable at the instance of the lenders. Applicants have filed the instant Application at the fag end of the CIR Process to replace the Resolution Professional who has already acquainted with the details of the business ventures, assets and other transactions of the Corporate Debtor. Therefore, the reasons given by the lenders for replacing the Resolution Professional and the procedure followed is not known to law. Moreover, it has also been noted by this Authority that the lenders have convened the meeting on 03.09.2018, which was not conducted in accordance with the provisions of the I&B Code, 2016. Conducting of the meetings of the CoCs is the responsibility of the Resolution Professional as and when required or deemed fit or at the request of any the CoCs members or any mandatory meeting warranted by the I&B Cade, 2016 and the Resolution Professional shall act as Chairman of such meetings. However, no such request was made by the CoCs to the Resolution Professional for conducting the meeting on 03.09.2018. Therefore, the same cannot be said to be the meeting of the CoCs as envisaged by the provisions of I & B Code, 2016. Thus, the decision taken by the Lenders for removing the Resolution Professional at the expiry of the CIRP is not in accordance with the law and the same is illegal and arbitrary action of the lenders and deserves to be set aside. Therefore, the resolution passed by the lenders on 03.09.2018 for replacing RP is declared null and void and set aside. Otherwise also, after the expiry of the CIRP period such a demand for replacing the Resolution Professional appears to be an afterthought and without backing of any of the provisions of the I&B Code, 2016. In the circumstances, the Application filed by the lenders stands dismissed.
|