Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + AT Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2022 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (12) TMI 776 - AT - Insolvency and BankruptcySeeking Liquidation of Corporate Debtor - Section 33 (3) (b) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - HELD THAT:- A Stakeholder, affected by the conduct of the Resolution Professional, may file a complaint, under IBBI (Grievance and Complaint Handling Procedure) Regulations 2017. Therefore, the Creditors are Stakeholders affected by the actions of Resolution Professional, may initiate Proceedings, under the aforesaid Regulations and in the event of allegations are sustained, the IBBI, may recommend for Replacement of a Resolution Professional, under Section 34 (4) (b) of the Code - As far as the present case is concerned, this Tribunal, points out that before the Adjudicating Authority, on behalf of Lenders, even though, a reliance was placed on the Minutes of Joint Lenders Meeting, that took place on 26.04.2022, the said Minutes, was conspicuously silent, about the aspect of any dissatisfaction being expressed, pertaining to the performance of the Resolution Professional, in the earnest opinion of this Tribunal. In the present case, despite, the fact that the Minutes of the Joint Lenders Meeting, that took place on 26.04.2022, were silent as regards the Lenders Expression of Dissatisfaction, relating to the Discharge of Duties, by the Resolution Professional and therefore, another Individual, be Replaced and Appointed, to function as Liquidator, there is no embargo in Law, for the Replacement of present / current Resolution Professional as Liquidator, by another Resolution Professional, on grounds / reasons, other than those specified under Section 34 (4) of the I & B Code, 2016 (especially, when the Lenders in their Commercial Decision and Wisdom, had opted for such a Replacement of the existing Resolution Professional, as Liquidator, by another Resolution Professional, which carries due weightage and the same cannot be brushed aside so lightly. As a matter of fact, the Adjudicating Authority, (National Company Law Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench - I, Hyderabad), had applied its mind and exercised its Judicial Discretion, in the impugned order, by making a pertinent Observation, that the graceful exit of the present Resolution Professional, will pave way for the smooth Liquidation Process, of the Corporate Debtor and permitted the plea of the Lenders, in this regard, and passed an Order of Liquidation, against the Corporate Debtor / M/s. Sainath Estates Pvt. Ltd., by appointing Mr. Gollamudi Krishna Mohan as Liquidator and the conclusion so arrived at, by the Adjudicating Authority, in the impugned order, is free from any Legal Infirmities, as held by this Tribunal. Appeal dismissed.
|