TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 618X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed by COC are kept in view, it is apparent that the Adjudicating Authority was required to treat Mr. Hari T. Devadiga as Authorized Representative whose name was even recognised by the Respondent No.1 when he filed CA No.669 of 2019. We find Adjudicating Authority had no power to impose Resolution Professional of its choice. Even for Authorised Representative decision of the majority is to be respected. The Impugned Order to the extent it appointed Respondent No.1 as Resolution Professional and Respondent No.2 as Authorised Representative - Matter remitted to the Adjudicating Authority directing that Mr. Hari T. Devadiga will be treated as the Authorized Representative of class of Financial Creditors (home or shop buyers) of Dreamz Infra India Ltd. under Section 21(6-A)(b) of IBC. Charge, if any, required to be handed over by Respondent No.2 shall be handed over to Mr. Hari T. Devadiga. The Adjudicating Authority shall in compliance of Section 22(4) forward the name of Mr. Konduru Prasanth Raju to the IBBI and follow the procedure as laid down in Section 22(4) and (5) of IBC. Appeal allowed by way of remand. - Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.34 of 2020 Company Appeal (AT) (In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ge 208. The learned Counsel submitted that there were three names circulated which can be seen if Page -210 is seen and in the second COC meeting after deliberations and voting, Mr. Hari T. Devadiga was declared as name approved for appointment as Authorized Representative (AR). The learned Counsel referred to the Resolution at Page 211 of the Appeal Paper Book to point out that from the different persons whose names were considered, the COC approved the name of Mr. Konduru Prasanth Raju as the Resolution Professional by 90% voting. 5. Learned Counsel for Appellant submitted that subsequently, even Respondent No.1 congratulated Mr. Hari T. Devadiga as well as Mr. Konduru Prasanth Raju by sending e-mails, copies of which are at Page Nos.203 and 220. 6. The learned Counsel is pointing out that Mr. Hari T. Devadiga the person who was selected by COC as Authorized Representative filed I.A. No.670 of 2019 in CP No. (IB) 84/BB/2019 (Annexure A-27) on behalf of COC requesting the Adjudicating Authority to confirm the name of Mr. Konduru Prasanth Raju as Resolution Professional. 7. The learned Counsel states that Respondent No.1, however, went ahead to file the Application ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... key fraudulent suspended Directors of the Corporate Debtor who are already behind the Bar. It has about 60+ sites, each having its own problem, almost all are Joint Venture, each site is 10+ Km away from one another, some of the Homebuyers are still continuing with the execution of their decrees which need to be stopped, completely hostile atmosphere, this is going to be the most difficult CIRP till date. b. Mr. Ashok Kriplani is requesting the Adjudicating Authority to fix fees of ₹ 6.75 Lakhs pm+ GST, plus out of pocket expenses as Mr. Ashok Kriplani is based in Delhi plus variable fees of 10% + GST as the success fees measured on the difference of liquidation valuation done by the valuers as per law and the valuation done at the time of completion of the projects and liberty to appoint professionals, consultants as per law. The learned Counsel submitted that the Orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority are in the interest of the CIRP proceedings and to protect the interest of the Corporate Debtor. He submits that the Appeal deserves to be rejected. It is stated by the learned Counsel that the Respondent No.1 has done lot of work which deserves to be recognis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 19 was filed informing the Adjudicating Authority regarding the selection of Konduru Prasanth Raju as RP. Sub-Section (4) of Section 22 provides that the Adjudicating Authority in such situation should forward the name of the Resolution Professional proposed under Clause (b) of Sub-Section (3) to the IBBI (Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India) for confirmation and such appointment will be made after confirmation by the Board. Under Sub-Section (5) of Section 22 if the Board does not confirm the name of the proposed Resolution Professional within 10 days of the receipt of the name of the proposed Resolution Professional, then the Adjudicating Authority shall direct the IRP to continue to function as Resolution Professional until such time as the Board confirms the appointment of the Resolution Professional. The Adjudicating Authority was required to follow this procedure which was not done and the Adjudicating Authority appears to have asked Respondent No.1 if he was willing and went ahead to appoint Respondent No.1 - Ashok Kriplani as Resolution Professional and Respondent No.2 Viswanathan Sankaran as the Authorized Representative. 11. Section 21(6-A) has provision with re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
