TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 954X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r any illegality or irrational has been pointed out by the Appellant except mere appointment as Liquidator by the Adjudicating Authority. Moreover, the Appellant failed to explain that the Adjudicating Authority lacks jurisdiction in appointing the Respondent as Liquidator. Furthermore, the CoC it its 4 th meeting held on 07.08.2018 passed a Resolution and decided to appoint the Respondent as Liquidator. It is to be presumed that the CoC in its commercial wisdom has taken a decision and reposed its confidence in the Respondent to act as Liquidator. Further, this Tribunal in SANDEEP KUMAR GUPTA VERSUS STEWARTS AND LLOYDS OF INDIA LTD. AND ANR. [ 2018 (4) TMI 276 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA ] held that the obse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal is filed under Section 61 of the Insolvency Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for short I B Code ) against the Order dated 01st September, 2020 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad) in I.A. No. 381 of 2018 in C.P. (IB) No. 208/9/NCLT/AHM/2017, whereby the Adjudicating Authority appointed Mr. Amit Gupta, the Respondent herein as Liquidator of the Corporate Debtor. Brief Facts: Appellant s Submissions: 2. Sh. Rudreshwar Singh, Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant submitted that the Appellant is a trust registered under the Indian Trust Act, 1882 formed with the object of protecting the interest of the shareholders of Winsome Diamonds and Jewellery Limited. The Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prayed this Bench to allow the Appeal by setting aside the appointment of Respondent as Liquidator. Respondent s Submissions : 7. The Respondent filed Reply Affidavit denying the averments made by the Appellant and submitted that the Adjudicating Authority passed the Order of Admission dated 13.02.2018 initiating CIRP against the Corporate Debtor and one Mr. Sunit Jagdishchandra Shah was appointed as IRP and later Mr. Anshuman Chaturvedi was appointed as RP by the CoC and confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority dated 30.05.2018. 8. It is submitted that in the 4th Meeting of CoC held on 08.08.2018, the CoC decided to liquidate the Corporate Debtor and resolved to appoint this Respondent as Liquidator and the RP filed I.A. No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t as Liquidator by the Adjudicating Authority. Moreover, the Appellant failed to explain that the Adjudicating Authority lacks jurisdiction in appointing the Respondent as Liquidator. Furthermore, the CoC it its 4 th meeting held on 07.08.2018 passed a Resolution and decided to appoint the Respondent as Liquidator. It is to be presumed that the CoC in its commercial wisdom has taken a decision and reposed its confidence in the Respondent to act as Liquidator. 12. Further, this Tribunal in Sandeep Kumar Gupta Vs. Stewarts Lloyds of India Ltd. Ors. in CA (AT) (Ins) No. 263 of 2017 held as under: In view of the aforesaid undisputed facts, while we hold that the observations made in the impugned order should not be construed to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
