Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + AT Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2022 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (11) TMI 1192 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHIClaim of the workmen and employees - inclusion in the Stakeholders Consultation Committee (‘SCC’) - Direction to Liquidator to immediately refund the fees of 11.5 crore (approx) taken by the Liquidator for or on account of illegal distribution of funds among the creditors of the corporate debtor to the bank account of the corporate debtor along with interest HELD THAT:- A coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in UP Awas Evam Vikas Parishad (UP Housing and Development Board) Vs. JNC Construction Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. [2022 (4) TMI 261 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI], has observed that there is no subsisting Claims of the Employees and all the Employees are getting their salaries on a regular basis. Based on the submissions of the Liquidator it is also recorded that the gratuity claim of the Employee is also not existing and has partially allowed the Appeal - it is clear that the ‘Corporate Debtor’ is being conducted as ‘a Going Concern’ and that the Banks would return the money if they are not entitled in accordance with Regulation 43 of the IBBI (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016. Inclusion as a representative in the SCC or not - HELD THAT:- Regulation 31 clearly specifies that ‘the Liquidator shall prepare a list of Stakeholders, category wise, on the basis of proves of Claims submitted and accepted under these Regulations’. In the instant case, the Claims made by the 16 Employees with respect to the one-month Notice Period was rejected and the same was not challenged vide an Appeal. Regulation 31-A(2), speaks of one representative of Workmen and Employees. Regulation 31-A flows from 31 and has to be read together and interpreted in its truest sense keeping the objective of the Code - Regulations 31 & 31-A specify that when the Employees have no subsisting Claim, they cannot be included in the list of Stakeholders, thereby meaning that if the Workers are not specifically includes in the list of Stakeholders, under Regulation 31, they cannot be made a part of the SCC under Regulation 31-A(1). Therefore, the contention of the Learned Counsel for the Appellant that one representative to be included whether the Claim is subsisting or not, is untenable. The ‘Corporate Debtor’ is ‘a Going Concern’ and an assurance as has been given by the Respondent that their Claims of gratuity as and when they arise would be paid as per the provisions of the Code, there are no illegality or infirmity in the Order of the Adjudicating Authority - appeal dismissed.
|