9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (5) TMI 491 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcySituation of recovery of claims post approved Resolution Plan - recovery of an amount to be paid in accordance with the provisions of Section 8B of Employees Provident Funds Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 along with interest under Section 7Q of the said Act and all costs, charges and expenses, after resolution plan approved and dues discharged/extinguished - HELD THAT - No one can come and raise demand/file claims after the Resolution Plan is approved and plan is under implementation. If claims are allowed to be admitted as and when the claims are submitted after the Plan is approved, then the Resolution Plan of the Stressed Assets shall fail and the objectives of the IBC defeated - It is also observed that in the approved Resolution Plan, it was clearly stated that barring aside the claims admitted and forming part of the Resolution Plan any other claim and/or demand prior to the effective date shall stand extinguished. Under these circumstances, the present application with the prayers needs to be allowed. Hence the demand of the Respondent prior to 20th September, 2018 amounting to Rs. 78,93,960.00, out of the total claim of Rs. 80,07,965.00 for the period February, 2016 to April, 2019 is hereby extinguished as prayed for in terms of the Resolution Plan approved - Application admitted.
Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the demand by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner for claims prior to the effective date of the Resolution Plan. 2. Compliance with the approved Resolution Plan and its binding nature on all stakeholders. 3. Application of the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Ltd. Vs. Satish Kumar Gupta & Ors. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Validity of the Demand by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner: The Applicant, Assam Company India Ltd., filed a Miscellaneous Application under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, challenging the demand of Rs. 78,93,960.00 by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner for the period February 2016 to April 2019. The Applicant argued that this amount pertains to the period before the effective date of the approved Resolution Plan (20th September 2018) and thus should be extinguished. The Tribunal noted that the Respondent issued a notice on 5th July 2019 and passed an order on 22nd February 2021, directing the Applicant to pay the amount. The Applicant replied, asserting that the demand for the period prior to the effective date stands discharged as per the approved Resolution Plan. 2. Compliance with the Approved Resolution Plan: The Tribunal emphasized that the Resolution Plan, approved on 20th September 2018, clearly stated that any claims or demands prior to the effective date shall stand extinguished. The Applicant reiterated this in their submissions, citing Clause 12.1.2 of the Resolution Plan, which discharges all claims of Government Authorities relating to the period before the effective date. The Tribunal observed that the Respondent failed to file its claim during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) and raised the demand post-approval of the Resolution Plan. The Tribunal referenced its previous orders, directing the Respondent to provide details of dues post-approval, which the Respondent did not comply with. 3. Application of the Supreme Court Judgment: The Tribunal referred to the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Ltd. Vs. Satish Kumar Gupta & Ors., which held that a successful Resolution Applicant should not face undecided claims after the Resolution Plan has been accepted. The judgment emphasized that all claims must be submitted and decided by the Resolution Professional to provide certainty to the Resolution Applicant. The Tribunal applied this principle, stating that allowing claims post-approval would defeat the objectives of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). Conclusion: The Tribunal concluded that the demand of Rs. 78,93,960.00 by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner for the period prior to the effective date (20th September 2018) is extinguished as per the approved Resolution Plan and the Supreme Court judgment. The Applicant is directed to continue making payments for statutory current dues, including Provident Fund amounts, in a timely manner. The Miscellaneous Application (MA (IBC) No. 01/GB/2021) is admitted and disposed of with these observations and directions.
|
