Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + AT Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2019 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (10) TMI 297 - AT - Insolvency and BankruptcyLiquidation of Corporate Debtor - approval of Committee of Creditors - irregularity in appointment of Resolution Professional - collusion between the Resolution Professional and the COC - bias and fraud - HELD THAT:- The Appellant vehemently argued that collusion between the Resolution Professional and the COC paved the way for liquidation of the Corporate Debtor. However, he was unable to demonstrate any material irregularity of substance to substantiate his argument. Admittedly, statutory Corporate Insolvency Resolution Period of 180 days further extended by 90 days computed from the date of appointment of Interim Resolution Professional has elapsed and there is no legal scope for extension of the period. Any irregularity or illegality right from order of admission till passing of the order of liquidation, if any, should have been challenged before the competent forum at the appropriate stage. The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process is time bound and the timelines set out by I&B Code, Rules and the Regulations framed thereunder have to be adhered to scrupulously. There is no ground for interference with the impugned order of liquidation. However, the direction enumerated in clause (g) of para 11 of the impugned order is repugnant to law and virtually conflicts with the recommendation of CoC for liquidation of Corporate Debtor as a going concern. The Adjudicating Authority landed in error in directing that the liquidation order shall be deemed as a notice of discharge to the officers, employees and workmen of the Corporate Debtor. This cannot be supported either in law or on the facts of this particular case. Appeal disposed off.
|