9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1192X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Anshuman Chaturvedi, to seek extension of moratorium period of the Corporate Debtor beyond 180 days on the following grounds:- (a) That this Adjudicating Authority, vide its order dated 6th November, 2017 passed on the application of Vitol S.A., being IA No.230 of 2017 in CP(IB) No.l9/7/NCLT/AHM/2017, directed the Resolution Professional to examine the transactions pointed out in the application, particularly the preferential transactions (Section 43) and undervalued transactions (Section 47); That this Adjudicating Authority has directed the Resolution Professional/Interim Resolution Professional to take all reasonable steps to recover all the amounts due to the Corporate Debtor and, therefore, it is necessary to obtain the details o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as filed this application under Section 12(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. 3. The facts, in brief, that are germane for the disposal of this application are as follows:- 4. IDBI Bank Limited, as Financial Creditor, filed CP(IB) No. 19 of 2017 against the Corporate Debtor, Asian Natural Resources India Limited. The said petition was admitted by this Adjudicating Authority on 23rd May, 2017, appointing Mr. Nitin Hasmukhlal Parikh as Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). The Interim Resolution Professional filed his report dated 13.06.2017 before this Adjudicating Authority giving the list of Financial Creditors and their claim amounts and constitution of Committee of Creditors. 5. The Interim Resolution Professional filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India through this Adjudicating Authority. In the said order, Vitol S.A. was given permission to place the relevant material in respect of the allegations made by it against the Corporate Debtor before the Interim Resolution Professional or Resolution Professional and, in such case, if the Interim Resolution Professional or the Resolution Professional is of the view that he has to invoke the jurisdiction of this Adjudicating Authority either under Section 43 or under Section 45 or under Section 49 of the IB Code, he is entitled to approach this Adjudicating Authority. 7. On 7.11.2017, the Committee of Creditors, through IDBI Bank, filed I.A. No.369 of 2017 seeking the following reliefs :- (a) To appoin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o be filed seeking extension of time. 9. The grounds on which this application is filed have already been narrated in the first paragraph of this order. 10. The main contention of the learned counsel appearing for the applicant is that this Adjudicating Authority, in its order dated 16.11.2017 passed in IA No.369, permitted the Resolution Professional, after his appointment, to file an application under Section 12(2) of the IB Code, if so authorised by the Committee of Creditors. 11. It is a fact that this Adjudicating Authority observed that the Resolution Professional is entitled to file an application under Section 12(2) of the IB Code, if so authorised by the Committee of Creditors. This observation was made while rejecting the reque ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2017. In between 20th June, 2017 and 23rd November, 2017, there is an adjourned first meeting of the Committee of Creditors held on 4th October, 2017. A perusal of the minutes of the adjourned meeting of the Committee of Creditors held on 4th October, 2017 discloses that the Committee of Creditors unanimously decided to make an application to NCLT for extension of period of moratorium upto 90 days beyond the period of 180 days to complete the resolution process. Basing on that resolution, the Committee of Creditors filed I.A. No.369 of 2017 seeking extension of moratorium period. The said application was dismissed on the ground that the Committee of Creditors cannot make such a request and such request has to be made by the Resolution Prof ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal because of the division among the Financial Creditors in the ratio of 65% 35%. Therefore, it is clear case where the Committee of Creditors was unable to agree on appointment of Resolution Professional till 4.10.2017. It is also the grievance of the Operational Creditor that its representations were not taken care of by the Committee of Creditors. Therefore, it is a case where the resolution process could not be completed only because of the division among the Financial Creditors in the matter of appointment of Resolution Professional till 4.10.2017. It appears that the CoC has not acted in a manner in which it is expected to conduct itself in Resolution Process. The reason stated by the Committee of Creditors in their meeting held on 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
