9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (1) TMI 796 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyAppointment of the proposed IRP - apprehension of bias against the appointment of the proposed IRP - It is submitted that Mr. Shailesh Verma is an ex-employee of SBI; joined the services of SBI in the year 1977 and since then he had been working with SBI till his retirement in 2016. He has been in the services of SBI for a period of over 39 years - HELD THAT - It is evident that such an Interim Resolution Professional is unlikely to act fairly and cannot be expected to act as an independent umpire. We grant an opportunity to the Financial Creditor to perform its statutory mandatory obligation by substituting the name of the Resolution Professional to act as an Interim Resolution Professional in place of the earlier one. The hearing is deferred to 15.01.2020 for compliance.
Issues:
- Objection raised regarding the proposed Interim Resolution Professional's potential bias due to prior employment at SBI. Analysis: The Respondent raised a specific objection concerning the proposed Interim Resolution Professional, Mr. Shailesh Verma, citing his prior employment at SBI for over 39 years until his retirement in 2016. The Respondent expressed apprehension of bias due to Mr. Verma's long-standing association with SBI, questioning his ability to act fairly and independently in the resolution process. The Petitioner did not contest this fact in their rejoinder, indicating agreement with the concerns raised by the Respondent. In light of the facts presented, the Tribunal acknowledged the potential conflict of interest and bias that could arise from Mr. Verma's background and employment history at SBI. Consequently, the Tribunal granted the Financial Creditor an opportunity to fulfill its statutory obligation by substituting the proposed Interim Resolution Professional with a different individual who could ensure impartiality and act as an independent decision-maker in the resolution proceedings. The Tribunal deferred the hearing to a later date, specifically 15.01.2020, to allow the necessary compliance with the directive to appoint a new Resolution Professional.
|
