TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 658X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... down in the IBC read with the Regulations and did not duly file claim in proper format within time. Even when the time was over and the Appellant department was advised by the Resolution Professional to get delay condoned by moving Adjudicating Authority, the department instead of resorting to Section 60 of IBC and other enabling provisions only sent a letter, further with a wrong Format, that too addressed to Adjudicating Authority - The Learned Counsel for the Appellant has not been able to show anything that the Application as such was filed or was registered or taken up with the Adjudicating Authority for consideration on the judicial side. Sending off a letter cannot be said to be in compliance with Part III of NCLT Rules, 2016, or Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (IBC in short). 3. According to the Appellant, the Appellant had filed claim with the Interim Resolution Professional on 07th August, 2019. On 16th August, 2019, the Appellant filed Application to consider Proof of claim along with condonation of delay before the Adjudicating Authority. It is argued for Appellant the letter was acknowledged as received by the Registry of Adjudicating Authority on 23rd August, 2019. According to the Appellant, even the Resolution Professional had inspected and looked into valuation of the attached goods by the department on 06th November, 2019. The grievance of the Appellant is that when the Adjudicating Authority passed the Impugned Order it did not take into consideration and include the claim made by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions for its effective implementation. 6. It appears from the Judgment in the matter of Ghanashyam Mishra Vs. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company that statutory dues, if not part of the Resolution Plan shall stand extinguished, if they are not part of the Resolution Plan (See Paragraphs 67, 77 87 read with Paragraph 95 of the Judgment). Thus, it is material that if Appellant wanted to claim statutory dues, it had to file claim as per procedures as laid down in IBC read with Rules and Regulations. 7. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Appellant was in correspondence with the Resolution Professional since February, 2019 and had approached the Resolution Professional with their claim. However, the Resolution ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t dues claimed are Operational Debt. Learned Counsel referred to the Reply-Affidavit filed by the Resolution Professional and it is stated that Public Notice after Admission of the Application under Section 9 of IBC was published on 23rd December, 2018 in Newspaper as mentioned in Reply-Affidavit Para 3 and Copy of which has been annexed. Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 1 has submitted that as per the Public Notice the claims should have been filed by 3rd January, 2019. In any case, if Regulation 12 of IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 was kept in view the claims should at the most have been filed in 90 days from Insolvency commencement date, but the same was not filed. 10. According to the R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... olution Professional had all the books of the accounts of the Corporate Debtor with the Resolution Professional and he should have taken on record the dues outstanding of the Appellant department and other departments. She submits that the Resolution Professional knew about the dues of the department but still did not take the same on record by the Resolution Applicant to consider. 12. (A) Regulation 7 of CIRP Regulations reads as under: 7. Claims by operational creditors (1) A person claiming to be an operational creditor, other than workman or employee of the corporate debtor, shall submit claim with proof to the interim resolution professional in person, by post or by electronic means in Form B of the Schedule: Provided ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cision taken by the committee prior to such inclusion. 13. It is apparent from the above that the Appellant was required to file claim in terms of IBC provisions but did not follow the procedure as laid down in the IBC read with the Regulations and did not duly file claim in proper format within time. Even when the time was over and the Appellant department was advised by the Resolution Professional to get delay condoned by moving Adjudicating Authority, the department instead of resorting to Section 60 of IBC and other enabling provisions only sent a letter, further with a wrong Format, that too addressed to Adjudicating Authority. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant has not been able to show anything that the Application as such wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
