Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + AT Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2019 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (5) TMI 1575 - AT - Insolvency and BankruptcyInitiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process - appointment of Interim Resolution Professional - non-conformity with the provisions of Section 8 and 9 of I&B Code - HELD THAT:- Initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process at the instance of an Operational Creditor is provided for under the provision engrafted in Section 9 of the I&B Code, whereunder an ‘Operational Creditor’ may file an application before the Adjudicating Authority for initiating a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process after complying with the statutory requirements of Section 8. The factum of Respondent No. 1 being appointed by Corporate Debtor as Assistant General Manager (Legal) on mutually agreed terms on a gross annual salary of ₹ 10 Lakhs in terms of Letter of Offer dated 10th January, 2014 is an admitted position in the case. Respondent No. 1 was required to join within seven days and letter of employment was to be issued subsequent to her joining. Though no such letter of employment required to be issued by the Corporate-Debtor is on record, it is the admitted position that Respondent No. 1 joined the organization viz. Corporate Debtor and rendered meritorious services in her capacity as AGM (Legal). No proof has also been educed to substantiate the contention that she was paid on an adhoc basis from time to time for the matters in which she was engaged and that such engagement was terminated w.e.f. November, 2015. In absence of proof of recall of letter of offer of employment to Respondent No. 1, and subsequent engagement as Retainer, the contention raised by the Appellant on this score deserves to be outrightly dismissed as a pure concoction, more so as the documents on record in general and the Letter dated 27th December, 2016 emanating from the Director of Corporate Debtor referred to hereinabove stares in the face of the Corporate Debtor. The defence raised by the Corporate Debtor before the Adjudicating Authority and the version put forth by the Appellant qua the claim of Respondent No.1, can be termed only as an attempt to wriggle out of the liability to deny the legitimate and legally payable claim of Respondent No. 1 and frustrate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process commenced at the instance of Respondent No. 1 on fabricated and concocted grounds. Appeal dismissed.
|