TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 246X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ified time period, could be considered at this belated stage? - HELD THAT:- It is admitted by the Appellant that he filed the claim on 1.1.2020. The affidavit submitted by erstwhile RP Respondent No. 2 (diary no. 30107 dated 20.8.2021) makes it clear that the 90 days period after the public announcement as allowed in the CIRP Regulations (supra) for filing proof of claims expired on 9.2.2019. Moreover the RP vide letter dated 3.1.2020 communicated to the Appellant the fact of rejection of his claim and also that the Resolution Plan is already under consideration of the Adjudicating Authority. Therefore, the fact of rejection of his claim was within the knowledge of Appellant from 3.1.2020. It is noted that the Resolution Plan was submitte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the claim of the Appellant. 2. The facts of the case are that the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (in short CIRP ) was initiated against the Corporate Debtor (Technovaa Plastic Industries Pvt. Ltd.) on 12.11.2018, whereafter the Resolution Professional made a public announcement inviting claims. The ninety-day period that is permitted under Regulation 12 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations ended on 19.2.2019, during which the creditors can file proof of their claims. The Appellant filed his claim for ₹ 81,50,13,952 on 1.1.2020 which was rejected by the Resolution Professional(in short RP ) vide letter dated 3.1.2020. The resolution plan was approved ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rd the oral arguments of the Learned Counsel of the Appellant and Respondents No. 1 and 2. The pleadings submitted by the parties as well as Written Submissions have been duly considered by us. 6. The Learned Counsel for Appellant has claimed that the Adjudicating Authority has directed that the RP should consider the claims made in IA No. 88 of 2020, 89 of 2020 and 61 of 2020 while distributing the amount to the Operational Creditors in the same proportion as applicable to other operational creditors. He has further claimed that the amount relating to pending dues of GST for five years amounting to ₹ 76,37,63,342 ought to have been considered out of his total claim of ₹ 82,50,32,952 made as being part of statutory dues. He h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l as the Adjudicating Authority it cannot be reopened so that the resolution process achieve finality in a time bound fashion. He has also stated that the Successful Resolution Applicant has implemented the approved Resolution Plan. As a further clarification, he has stated that the proposal under Sab ka Vishwas Scheme was filed by the erstwhile management of the Corporate Debtor and not by the Resolution Professional or Successful Resolution Applicant and the discharge given in one case was to the erstwhile management of the Corporate Debtor. Therefore any pending dues are to be paid by the erstwhile management of the corporate debtor. He has strongly urged that in the circumstances stated by him, the appeal may be rejected. 8. The Le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... communicated to the Appellant the fact of rejection of his claim and also that the Resolution Plan is already under consideration of the Adjudicating Authority. Therefore, the fact of rejection of his claim was within the knowledge of Appellant from 3.1.2020. It is noted that the Resolution Plan was submitted for approval to the Adjudicating Authority on 4.9.2020, which was much before the claim was filed by the Appellant. The erstwhile RP has stated in his additional affidavit (supra) that the claim of the Appellant did not form part of the Resolution Plan as it was filed belatedly and rejected by the Resolution Professional. 11. It has also come to our knowledge during oral arguments that Successful Resolution Professional has impleme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l under Section 31 could be continued. 12. In the case of Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Limited through Authorised Signatory (supra), relevant portion of this judgment is reproduced below:- 107. ..A successful resolution applicant cannot suddenly be faced with undecided claims after the resolution plan submitted by him has been accepted as 65 this would amount to a hydra head popping up which would throw into uncertainty amounts payable by a prospective resolution applicant who would successfully take over the business of the corporate debtor. All claims must be submitted to and decided by the resolution professional so that a prospective resolution applicant knows exactly what has to be paid in order that it ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
