9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 1320X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that the CIRP in respect of the Corporate Debtor was initiated by this Tribunal vide its order dated 09.12.2019 and the Applicant herein was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). Thereafter, as per the decision of the COC in its 2nd meeting, the IRP was confirmed as Resolution Professional and this Tribunal also vide its Order dated 21.10.2020 confirmed the same. 3. It was submitted that the in the course of business, M/s. Regen Powertech Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Corporate Debtor) has issued a Purchase Order to the 1st Respondent supply of materials vide PO Number: R9/4518000654, dated 29.01.2018. Thereafter, the 1st Respondent is said to have supplied the following materials: a) IGBT Stack, SKMP4 with Fuse Air Cooled, Item Code 30000640 Prod Sr. No. 17M0444 to 17M0479, 482 to 505, (60 Nos.), vide Invoice No. 84, dated 12.02.2018, for a sum Rs. 91,35,000/-; b) i) IGBT Stack, SKiiP4 with Fuse Air Cooled, Item Code 30000640. Prod Sr. No. 17M0506 to 17M0511, (6 Nos.); and ii) DIODE Module Stack, Item Code 30000141 Prod Sr. No. D17A0534 to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... voice Bill Nos. 102B, 105A, 106A, 107A, 108A and 112A to the tune of Rs. 1,56,51,772/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty Six Lakhs Fifty One Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventy Two Only) are fake and no materials were supplied under the said Invoice Bills. The 1st Respondent in connivance with Respondents 2 to 4 have raised fake invoices without supplying any materials and fraudulently encashed the Letter of Credit and siphoned off funds, defrauding the Creditors. 6. In the circumstances, it was submitted that the Applicant through various emails has required the 1st Respondent to furnish particulars regarding the materials supplied and raised queries regarding the falsification of Invoice bills and fraudulent receipt of payment. The 1st Respondent has issued a Reply dated 12.03.2021, duly admitting that Invoices were manipulated on the specific request of the Corporate Debtor and giving an untenable justification for creating fake Invoice Bills. It may be seen that even as per the details given by the 1st Respondent in the said Reply, the most of the Invoice Bills mentioned therein have not reflected in the Ledger Account submitted by the 1st Respondent alongwith the Claim to the Applicant. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... moratorium order under Section 14 shall cease to have effect and the RP shall forward all the records relating to the CIRP and the Resolution Plan to the Board to be recorded on it database. Thus, the role of a RP comes to an end here. 9. It was submitted that there is a START line and FINISH line for the Resolution process. Section 23 clearly stipulates that the role of the RP is to manage the affairs of the Corporate Debtor 'during the resolution process and NOT thereafter. The RP merely conducts and manages the operations of the Corporate Debtor, during the CIRP process and not beyond. Any other interpretation could lead to a situation where an RP could be an "RP or a 'Former RP for years together without any definite end date. Infact a perusal of the Resolution Plan approved by this Adjudicating Authority (relevant pages of which is annexed as Annexure 2) reveals the following lines under the heading "5.2.10 Litigations, Inquiries, Investigations etc.": "For avoidance of doubt, it is clarified that, during the CIRP Period, the Resolution Professional will be entitled to file or initiate applications or relevant proceedings in respect of preferential ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Applicant herein has failed to establish that the business of the Corporate Debtor was carried in a fraudulent manner and that R1 was a party who was knowingly involved in such a fraudulent business. Rather, the Applicant has come up with allegations which have no relevance in order to attract the provisions of section 66 of IBC. The applicant has absolutely failed to prove R1's mens rea to defraud the creditors of the Corporate Debtor. 14. The 2nd and 3rd Respondent has filed counter and it was submitted that the answering Respondents are not necessary parties in the Application since the 1st Respondent is the right party liable to provide for any explanation pertaining to the present Application. It was submitted that the 1st Respondent is a vendor who had a running account with the Corporate Debtor and any amounts that were due were always adjusted in the subsequent invoices or by way of encashment of letters of credit. Further, it is false to state that the invoices raised are fake and that no materials were received. It was submitted that the IGBT stacks that were purchased by the Corporate Debtor from the 1st Respondent were utilized for wind turbines supplied by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
