Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + AT Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2021 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (8) TMI 393 - AT - Insolvency and BankruptcyReplacement of IRP - Case of appellant is that the Application for the replacement of IRP was time barred on the date of passing of the impugned order as more than 270 days (herein more than 470 days) has already elapsed from the start of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process - HELD THAT:- The NCLT under order dated 11.12.2020 (at page 235 of the Reply Affidavit of Respondent No. 3) excluded a period of 252 days i.e. from 04.02.2020 to 13.10.2020 and allowed the extension of 90 days with the direction to the RP to expedite the process for seeking Resolution Plan. On the admitted facts and judgment relied by the Respondents particularly in the case of K. SASHIDHAR VERSUS INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK & OTHERS [2019 (2) TMI 1043 - SUPREME COURT] wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that “The commercial wisdom of CoC has been given paramount status without any judicial intervention” and in the instant case the decision taken by the CoC in the commercial wisdom has been approved by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority - this Appellate Tribunal in NAVEEN KUMAR JAIN VERSUS COMMITTEE OF CREDITORS OF K.D.K ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD. & ORS. [2020 (11) TMI 957 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI ] wherein this Appellate Tribunal has held that replacement of IRP/RP also falls within the commercial wisdom of the CoC. The Appellant does not have vested any right to continue on the post of IRP / Resolution Professional - there is no illegality committed by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority while passing the impugned order. Appeal dismissed.
|