2020 (2) TMI 1465 - AT - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Maintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its dues - Operational Creditor - impugned order is assailed primarily on the ground that the claim filed by the Appellants in regard to debts due and payable in future could not be rejected - HELD THAT - The prayer in the appeals cannot be acceded to at this stage when the Resolution Process is underway and has not fructified into approval of a Resolution Plan. Moreover, the Adjudicating Authority has already taken care of the apprehensions of Appellants in so far as incorporation of the claims as regards loss and damages claimed to be operational debt in Information Memorandum is concerned. Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against order dismissing applications by Operational Creditors regarding debts due and payable in future, authority of Resolution Professional to admit or reject claims, applicability of a previous judgment, concerns of Operational Creditors regarding claims in Information Memorandum, and dismissal of appeals.

Analysis:

1. Appellants' Grievance and Impugned Order:
The Appellants, Operational Creditors, filed five appeals challenging the order of the Adjudicating Authority dismissing their applications. The impugned order observed that information about disputes with the Corporate Debtor, including claims arising from loss or damages, should be included in the Information Memorandum. The Appellants contended that their claims for debts due and payable in the future should not have been rejected, citing a precedent from the Appellate Tribunal.

2. Authority of Resolution Professional:
The Appellants sought to admit their claims, arguing that the Resolution Professional should have the authority to do so. However, the Tribunal clarified that the Resolution Professional's role is limited to collecting and collating claims for inclusion in the Information Memorandum. Unlike a Liquidator, the Resolution Professional does not have the power to admit or reject claims. Such determinations are only addressed during the consideration of a Resolution Plan before the Adjudicating Authority.

3. Applicability of Previous Judgment:
The Appellants relied on a previous judgment related to claims of Financial Creditors maturing in the future. However, the Tribunal found that this judgment was not applicable to the Operational Creditors' claims in the present case.

4. Concerns of Operational Creditors:
The Operational Creditors expressed concerns about the inclusion of their claims in the Information Memorandum, especially regarding operational debts arising from loss and damages. The Adjudicating Authority directed the Resolution Professional to incorporate information about such claims, even if disputed, in the Information Memorandum.

5. Dismissal of Appeals:
The Tribunal concluded that the appeals lacked merit and dismissed them. It clarified that no opinion was expressed on the admissibility of the Appellants' claims, allowing them to raise the issue before the Adjudicating Authority at the appropriate stage. Any interim directions were also vacated as a result of the dismissal of the appeals.

This detailed analysis covers the various issues raised in the judgment, providing a comprehensive understanding of the Tribunal's decision and the legal principles involved.