9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 1324X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sanchi Jain, Ms. Kathleen Lobo, Mr. Chitranshul Sinha, Mr. Sagar Bansal, Mr. Dhruv Parwal and Ms. Alina Mathew, Advocates for R-2 Mr. Abhijeet Sinha, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Sudeshna Guha Roy, Mr. Syamantak Sen, Mr. Treenok Guha, Mr. Anup Deshmukh and Mr. Pranav Parikh, Advocates for Sheth Developers ORDER ASHOK BHUSHAN , J. This Application by the new RP appointed by the Impugned Order dated 13.05.2024 has been filed praying for following reliefs : "a. Allow the present application; b. Permit the applicant to manage the operations of the corporate debtor as a going concern and also permit the applicant to perform all the duties under section 18 of IBC and exercise the powers required to fulfil the same except those that are speci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I.A. It is submitted by them that no direction be issued to make any payment. It is submitted that all payments are required to be approved by the CoC, hence the existing CoC be directed to vet the claims and expenses. It is prayed that the Appeal itself may be finally decided. 4. Learned Counsel appearing for Suraksha Reality Limited and Sheth Developers Pvt. Ltd. submit that expenses as prayed be allowed subject to ratification by reconstituted CoC. 5. We have considered the submissions of the Counsel for the Parties and perused the Application and the Reply filed therein. 6. The present Appeal as well as other Appeals have been filed challenging the Order dated 13.05.2024, by which Order the Adjudicating Authority on an Application f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pplication is disposed of accordingly." 8. It is disputed by Counsel for the Central Bank of India and Arrow Engineering Ltd. that Corporate Debtor is not running as a going concern, hence no payment be directed towards the salary as claimed by the RP. Learned Counsel has also relied on the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of 'Sunil Kumar Jain & Ors.' Vs. 'Sunaresh Bhatt & Ors.' reported in AIR 2022 SC 1985 to support his submission that unless the employees have worked during CIRP period, no CIRP cost be paid. 9. We have already directed the Appeal to be listed 'For Hearing' on 31.01.2025, we are of the view that Appeal need to be decided as has been agreed by the Parties. However, for the time being, we are of the vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
