9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (2) TMI 1128 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcySeeking replacement of Liquidator - Section 60(5)(c) of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, read with Section 276 of the Companies Act, 2013 and Rule 11 of National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 - HELD THAT - It is evident from the medical record, Annexure 2, that the applicant is suffering from essential hypertension and blood pressure and that he is a senior citizen. Further, Annexure-3 reveal that his son has been transferred to Bangalore and in this way, he is unable to act as liquidator - the ends of justice would be met, if the applicant Kuljeet Singh, Insolvency Professional, appointed as Liquidator in this case, is replaced. Application allowed.
Issues: Application for replacement of liquidator under Section 60(5)(c) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 read with Section 276 of the Companies Act, 2013.
Detailed Analysis: 1. Background and Application: The application was filed seeking the replacement of the current liquidator of a company under the relevant provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and the Companies Act, 2013. The applicant cited medical reasons and personal circumstances for the request. 2. Legal Provisions: The Tribunal examined Section 276 of the Companies Act, 2013, which provides grounds for the removal and replacement of a liquidator. The section outlines various reasons, including misconduct, professional incompetence, inability to act, and conflict of interest, for the Tribunal to consider such a request. 3. Medical Condition and Personal Circumstances: The Tribunal considered the medical reports annexed to the application, which highlighted the serious ailments of the current liquidator, a senior citizen with health issues. Additionally, personal circumstances such as the transfer of the liquidator's son were taken into account. 4. Decision and Appointment: After careful consideration of the facts presented, the Tribunal found the application maintainable and in line with the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013. Relying on Section 276(1)(d) of the Act, the Tribunal allowed the application and appointed a new liquidator, Mr. Amit Kumar Goyal, from the panel of Insolvency Professionals. 5. Directions and Compliance: The Tribunal issued specific directions for the handover of records and assets from the current liquidator to the newly appointed one. It also mandated the new liquidator to file necessary consents, affidavits, and progress reports as required by the regulations. 6. Fee Determination: While the applicant did not request a fee in the application, the Tribunal referred to the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code regarding the payment of the liquidator's fee. The determination of the fee was to be done in accordance with the relevant regulations. 7. Conclusion: The Tribunal disposed of the application, appointing a new liquidator based on the grounds presented and ensuring compliance with the legal requirements and procedures outlined in the Companies Act, 2013 and the regulations governing insolvency proceedings. This detailed analysis covers the key aspects of the judgment, including the legal provisions, factual circumstances, decision-making process, and the actions required for compliance with the Tribunal's orders.
|
