9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 832X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... short 'Code'). Nandkishore Bhatia was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional (in short 'IRP') but the Committee of Creditors (in short 'CoC') in its meeting held on 13.01.2020 appointed B.K Mishra as the Resolution Professional (in short 'RP') which was approved by the Adjudicating Authority vide its order dated 24.01.2020. 2. The IRP published a public announcement on 22.10.2019, inviting the claims of the creditors from the Corporate Debtor. The claims of the Financial and Operational Creditors were received and admitted as under:- Stake holder Claim received Claim Admitted Financial Creditors Bank of Baroda 182.13 182.13 Total Secured Financial Creditors Dues 182.13 182.13 Financial Creditor Unsecured and related 6.96 6.85 Operational creditors 34.19 24.98 Statutory Dues 8.50 4.61 Claims filed by workman 4.87 4.19 Other Creditor (other than financial and operational ) 0.73 0.35 Total 237.39 223.10 3. The RP obtained the valuation of the fixed assets, the securities and financial assets and during the period of CIRP issued Form-G for inviting Expression of Interest (EOI). He received EOIs from three Prospecti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ordered to pay it to the Financial Creditors. 5. On 19.09.2022, the application bearing I.A. No. 2464 of 2021 filed by the RP for approval of the resolution plan was allowed. 6. The present appeal has been filed by three Operational Creditors mentioned hereinabove to challenge the order dated 19.09.2022 passed in I.A. No. 2464 of 2021, inter alia, on the ground that the RP has committed a serious error of law in not complying with the provision of Section 24(3)(c) and 24(4) of the Code for not issuing notice to the Appellants despite the fact that the Appellant as a class (Operational Creditors) are having the debt exceeding 10%. 7. Counsel for the Appellant has vehemently argued that as per Section 18(1)(b) of the Code, it is the duty of the IRP to receive and collate all the claims submitted by the Creditors to him. It is further submitted that the IRP had collated the claims of the Financial Creditors, Operational Creditors, Statutory Dues, Claims filed by workman & other Creditor (other than financial and operational). The Operational Creditor submitted a claim of Rs. 34.19 Crores out of which he admitted 24.98 Crores which is admittedly more than 10% of the total claims. He ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice has been caused to them for not-complying with Section 24(3) of the Code. 9. Counsel for Respondent No. 3 (SRA) has submitted that there is no lapse on its part in so far as the compliance of the provision of the Code is concerned and if there is any lapse then it is attributable to the RP if he has not issued notice as prescribed under Section 24(3)(c) of the Code because the SRA has bonafidely persued the application and the CoC has approved its plan by voting share of 96.38%. He has thus submitted that his plan may not be set aside. 10. We have heard Counsel for the parties and perused the record. 11. Admitted facts are that the present Appellants are part of Operational Creditors whose claim is cumulatively admitted to be Rs. 24.98 Crore which is more than 10% of the admitted debt of the Corporate Debtor. There is also no denial of the fact that the RP did not issue notice to the Operational Creditors in terms of Section 24(3)(c) of the Code. It is also a fact that even if notice had been given to the Operational Creditors even then they had no right to vote in the meeting of the CoC in view of Section 24(4) of the Code but the question herein arises is as to whether is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n person or by such electronic means as may be specified. Section 24(2) provides that all the meetings of the CoC shall be conducted by the RP. Section 24(3) provides that the RP shall give notice of each meeting of the CoC including the authorised representatives, members of suspended board of director and or partners of the Corporate Persons and Operational Creditors or their representatives if the amount aggregated is not less than 10% of the debt. Section 24(4) says that the directors or partners and representative of Operational Creditors who are mentioned in sub-section (3) may attend the meetings of CoC but shall not have any right to vote in such meetings and in case they remain absent despite notice then the proceedings of the CoC shall not be invalidated on that account. 14. A bare reading of the aforesaid provision i.e. Section 24(3)(c) shows that it is mandatory in nature and it is incumbent upon the RP to serve notice to all the Operational Creditors of each meeting of the CoC or if they elect their authorised representatives after notice is received by them, then the notice of meeting to the authorised representatives. There is no question of otherwise knowledge acqu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
