Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2021 (3) TMI 1346

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s submitted their resolution plan on the basis of their financial capacity and availability of funds - If such claim is accepted, then the Resolution Applicants have to make corrections in their plans, that apart, RP has to make corrections in the IM and its report, correction in the stakeholder list, etc., for which RP has to take permission from this Adjudicating Authority, which may further delay the CIRP. Moreover, CIRP cannot be allowed/extended beyond upper limit of 330 days, in that event the corporate debtor would be compelled to go for liquidation. There is every likelihood that the Resolution Applicants may withdraw their plan, as it will be a burden with other huge claims of the creditors, which they might have not planned earlier, while working out the resolution plan based on the Information Memorandum. Thus, under such situation, the corporate debtor may be pushed for liquidation - Application dismissed. - IA No.17/2021 In CP (IB) No.122/Chd/HP/2019 - - - Dated:- 21-3-2022 - HON BLE MR. HARNAM SINGH THAKUR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) And HON BLE MR. SUBRATA KUMAR DASH, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) For the Applicant : Mr. Raghav Kakkar, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sfaction of the corporate debtor. A copy of the invoices raised by the corporate debtor is attached with the application as Annexure A-8. 5. It is averred by the applicant that the corporate debtor has admitted for retention of the amount upto ₹ 31,29,693/-. However, as per the work order, the said amount was only liable to be retained for the period of six months. The corporate debtor has not even made a single communication disputing the retention amount pending towards the applicant. A copy of the summary of the accounts is attached with the application as Annexure A-9. 6. It is contended that the applicant on March 20, 2020 filed its proof of claim for total of amount of ₹ 1,19,33,688/- (Rupees One Crore Nineteen Lakh Thirty Three Thousands Six Hundred and Eighty-Eight only) to Mr. Sanjay Kumar Aggarwal, Resolution Professional of the Corporate Debtor, both by an e-mail and registered speed post. A copy of e-mail dated March 20, 2020 and speed post receipt dated March 21, 2020 are attached with the application as Annexure A-10. 7. The respondent has submitted in its reply the timeline demonstrating the active conduct of the Applicant is stated herein under: .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rding the prayers of the Applicant issues notice to the Respondent. 8. It is submitted that though the Applicant submitted the claim for the first time on March 20, 2020, and kept on sending reminders to the Respondent, there was no reply, whatsoever, by the Respondent. Also, the Respondent on Midnight of November 13, 2020 to November 14, 2020 first time sought documents from the Applicant. Though, the Applicant was not given reasonable time, yet, the Applicant acting diligently replied to the Respondents on November 16, 2020. 9. It is contended that the respondent had filed an application IA No.797/2020 whereby this Tribunal has granted extension of 90 days for completion of CIRP to the respondent-RP. The claim of the Applicant before the Respondent (March 20, 2020) and application of the Applicant (January 1, 2021) both are filed before the expiry of CIRP period (i.e. March 11, 2021 extend by this Tribunal for 90 days vide Order dated December 11, 2020). 10. It is submitted by the applicant that there is a breach of Regulation 13 read with Regulation 14 of the Insolvency Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Reg .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 18/11/2020 Claim in accordance to Regulation 7(1) submitted by the applicant vide email. Kindly refer to Annexure C (Page No.19) of Affidavit in Opposition. 15. It is alleged by the respondent that the claim of the applicant (Concept Infracon Pvt. Ltd.) was received far later than the due date (i.e. 22.03.2020) of receipt of claims as stipulated under the Code and Regulations thereof and further also after the receipt of the resolution plan from the Resolution Applicant (i.e. 17.11.2020). 16. It is submitted that in the instant matter the resolution plan was submitted by the Resolution Applicant on 17.11.2020. That applicant for the first time submitted his claim in proper form as mandated under Law on 18.11.2020. 17. It is contended by the respondent that from the date of issue of public notice (on 26.12.2019) and the extended period of 90 days (25.03.2020) as provided under the Regulation 12(2) of the Insolvency Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016. Further, any interruption in the CIRP at this stage by including a delayed claim will mean setting the clock ba .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... heir financial capacity and availability of funds. There is every likelihood, if the claim of different creditors are accepted in a phased manner and/or on such belated stage, that too, after the stipulated time so provided for submitting claims, in that event the resolution plans can never get materialized and there would be no resolution of corporate debtor. This will defeat the object of the IB Code, more so, when CIRP is to be completed in a time bound manner. If such claim is accepted, then the Resolution Applicants have to make corrections in their plans, that apart, RP has to make corrections in the IM and its report, correction in the stakeholder list, etc., for which RP has to take permission from this Adjudicating Authority, which may further delay the CIRP. Moreover, CIRP cannot be allowed/extended beyond upper limit of 330 days, in that event the corporate debtor would be compelled to go for liquidation. 22. Further, if this application is allowed, then, there is every likelihood that the Resolution Applicants may withdraw their plan, as it will be a burden with other huge claims of the creditors, which they might have not planned earlier, while working out the resol .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates