9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (7) TMI 788X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 being C.P. No. 980 of 2018 had been instituted by the Financial Creditor being Union Bank of India and the said Petition was allowed by an order dated August 8, 2019 of this NCLT Bench and one Mr. Pinaki Sircar was appointed as an Interim Resolution Professional. However, the said Pinaki Sircar didn't wish to continue and the Respondent Mr. Kanakabha Ray was appointed as the Resolution Professional by the Committee of Creditors through a voting percentage of about 68% obviously having regard to his past loyalty and long services rendered to the Financial Creditor. The Respondent/RP, however never mentioned that he was an employee of the Financial Creditor who had voted in favour of his appointment as Resolution Professional of the Corporate Debtor. The Resolution Professional or the Financial Creditor were under an obligation but never disclosed that the Resolution Professional had personal knowledge about the transactions between the Financial Creditor and the Corporate Debtor, which fact got revealed in course of conduct of proceedings subsequently. 3. It is stated that the said Resolution Professional was an employee of the Financial Credito ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted that an application was taken out for seeking exclusion of 70 days period from the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Proceeding period being I. A. No. 330 of 2020 which was dismissed by this Hon'ble Tribunal inter alia directing the Resolution Professional to take out necessary application under Section 12(2) of the Code with the concurrence of the COC. It is stated that if no resolution for extension of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Proceeding was passed by the Committee of Creditors within the period of the said 180 days, it ought to be deemed that the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Processes period of the Corporate Debtor is over and the said Corporate Debtor is into liquidation. Being aware of the above legal position and the direction of the Tribunal in its order dated February 25, 2020, the Committee of Creditors of the Corporate Debtor is alleged to have held a meeting on March 13, 2020 duly convened by the Resolution Professional and had resolved to file application under Section 12(2) of the Code, 2016 by the Resolution Professional. Surprisingly the order passed by this Tribunal dated February 25, 2020 has been purposely misinterpreted by the Respondent. No r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e such documents. It is relevant to mention herein that the Resolution Professional in collusion and connivance with the COC member has refused to let in the representative of the Members of Board of Directors (suspended) of the Corporate Debtor to participate in the Committee of Creditors meetings inter alia alleging that the representatives are not allowed to participate. 9. It is stated that the Corporate Debtor is not doing any business for the last 9 (nine) years. The Financial Creditor in spite of having knowledge is seeking to harass the Members of Board of Directors (suspended) of the Corporate Debtor by appointing his own men and agents as Process Advisors. The Resolution Professional has appointed one Sunil Mohan Acharya and one Tapan Chakraborty as his Process Advisor who are also ex-employees of the Financial Creditor and also are running a Company under the name and style of Intelligent IP Management Solution Private Limited with one Mr. Jainaryan Gupta. The said Resolution Professional and the aforesaid persons being ex- employees of the Financial Creditor have sought to serve for the Financial Creditor than the Corporate Debtor. 10. Furthermore, it is stated that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... India has appointed the RP using its then 68% stake despite dissent from PNB. RP and his two partners draw substantial retirement benefits and pension form Union Bank of India. Even CA, Jai Narayan Gupta who is filing a power of attorney on behalf of RP is the 4th director of IPE company and another partner of RP. As per the judgment of the Hon'ble NCLAT in State Bank of India Vs. Metanere Limited dated 22nd May, 2020 (supra), it has been held that the RP having long service with the financial creditor and receiving pension benefits from it, would raise a presumption of bias and RP should be removed. 14. It is finally submitted by the learned counsel that the RP is justifying not taking steps and stating that "however, as per past experience the National Company Law Tribunal's order u/s 19(3) has not been effective since National Company Law Tribunal is, usually, shy in issuing the related punitive order u/s 70 of IBC 2016." Further justification by making scurrilous allegation against the Bench by saying that "Some legal professionals appear before the benches regularly and they earn a face value before the benches. The benches tend to hear them calmly and also rely on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llowed to be appointed as R.P. It is submitted that when a person himself admits that he was in the employment of the Financial Creditor, and the CD has raised an objection and is levelling allegations of bias against him, he should have immediately resigned but since the RP has not done so, we shall consider the point in issue on the basis of the judicial pronouncements placed on record. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that all acts done by the RP being illegal and bad in law, might not be relied upon and be set aside. 18. During the course of arguments, the RP, when confronted with the unwarranted remarks made in the note accompanying the Minutes of the 7th COC meeting, he admitted and realized his mistake, but submitted that that it was not intentional. We, however, informed him that this Bench did not like the casual way he has been drawing the official notes and it may create trouble for him, as this Bench had taken the said views/comments of the RP in a very serious manner and this may entail further proceedings against him. As he agreed to submit an affidavit within two days, tendering unqualified apologies for these injudicious and unwarranted remarks in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
