9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (9) TMI 1223 - Tri - Companies LawValidity of entire action of the Resolution Professional - seeking direction to Resolution Professional to call the Suspended Management in the CoC meeting after giving the Agenda and to supply/provide the copy of Resolution Plan received by the RP before taking any decision of the Resolution Plan whether being accepted or not - HELD THAT - On perusal of the records, it is found that the Hon ble Gujarat High Court has passed the order on 18.06.2019 on the application so made by the Applicant, wherein certain conditions were imposed by the Hon ble High Court - That itself shows that the Applicant cannot meet the Bank officials since they are the consortium of Bank and CBI is still investigating further. In view of such order passed by the Hon ble High Court, Applicant again moved a modification application for modification of the conditions. The said application was disposed of by the Hon ble High Court on 13.11.2019. However, by that time all the meetings of the CoC was/were concluded. Application dismissed as being not maintainable.
Issues:
1. Alleged violation of Section 24 and 25(2) of the Insolvency Code by the Resolution Professional. 2. Denial of participation in Committee of Creditors meetings to Suspended Management. 3. Allegations of dragging the Corporate Debtor into liquidation. 4. Non-consideration of bids for revival of the Corporate Debtor. 5. Allegations of misappropriation of funds and fraud by the Suspended Management. 6. Dispute over the right of Suspended Management to attend CoC meetings. 7. Allegations of deception by the Applicant. 8. Allegations of suppression of facts by the Applicant. 9. Compliance with orders of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court. 10. Infructuous nature of the instant application. Analysis: 1. The Suspended Management filed an application seeking various reliefs, including a declaration of the Resolution Professional's actions as void under Sections 24 and 25(2) of the Insolvency Code. The Applicant alleged that they were not called to CoC meetings and were denied access to essential documents, violating their rights under the IB Code. 2. The Applicant contended that the RP and CoC were focused on liquidation rather than resolution, highlighting past bids for revival that were disregarded. The RP denied these allegations, accusing the Applicant of misdeeds and fraud, supported by ongoing investigations by CBI and ED. 3. The RP argued that the Applicant's allegations of non-inclusion in CoC meetings were baseless, citing the right of Suspended Management to attend meetings and access the Resolution Plan. RP also mentioned the Applicant's legal issues as a reason for limited participation. 4. The RP further defended their actions by providing evidence of notices sent to the Applicant for CoC meetings, despite challenges posed by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court's conditions restricting the Applicant's interactions with Bank officials, who were CoC members. 5. The RP emphasized the importance of completing the CIRP within the mandated timeframe and highlighted their efforts to cooperate with the Applicant within legal constraints. The RP maintained that the Applicant's inability to attend meetings due to court-imposed restrictions rendered the instant application infructuous. 6. The Tribunal considered the sequence of events, including the High Court's orders and the concluded CoC meetings, leading to the determination that the application was no longer maintainable. Consequently, the application was disposed of based on the circumstances presented during the proceedings.
|
