Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + Tri Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2022 (6) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (6) TMI 719 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyLiquidation of Corporate Debtor - Non-receipt of Expression of Interest by the Resolution Professional - publication of Form G - HELD THAT - Since, more than 1000 days has expired from the commencement of CIRP, no Expression of Interest was received and the 180 days CIRP period has expired, the CoC at its 22nd meeting Annexed at pages 48 to 49 of the application held on 18/05/2022 had recommended liquidation of the Corporate Debtor with 100% voting shares - The Resolution Professional has not consented to act as a Liquidator of the Corporate Debtor. Section 33(1)(a) of the Code mandates that the Adjudicating Authority shall pass an order of liquidation where no resolution plan is received before the expiry of the CIRP. Sub-section (2) thereof requires the Adjudicating Authority to pass the liquidation order where the Resolution Professional intimates to the Adjudicating Authority the decision of the Committee of Creditors approved by not less than 66% of the voting share to liquidate the Corporate Debtor - Reading these two provisions together, this Adjudicating Authority is left with no option but to order liquidation of the Corporate Debtor. The Corporate Debtor is ordered to be liquidated in terms of section 33(2) of the Code read with subsection (1) - Application allowed.
Issues: Liquidation of Corporate Debtor, Replacement of Resolution Professionals, Extension of CIRP Period
Liquidation of Corporate Debtor: The Tribunal considered an application filed by the Resolution Professional of a Corporate Debtor, stating that no Expression of Interest (EoI) was received for the liquidation process despite prior efforts. The history of the case highlighted the appointment and replacement of various Resolution Professionals due to different reasons. As the CIRP period had exceeded 1000 days, and no resolution plan was received, the Committee of Creditors recommended liquidation with 100% voting shares. The Tribunal, in accordance with the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, ordered the liquidation of the Corporate Debtor. The Resolution Professional was directed to hand over all necessary documents to the appointed Liquidator, who would initiate the liquidation process as per the relevant regulations. The powers of the Board of Directors would cease, and the Liquidator would take charge of managing the liquidation process. Replacement of Resolution Professionals: Multiple applications were filed for the replacement of Resolution Professionals during the course of the proceedings. The Tribunal approved the appointment of different professionals based on the recommendations of the Committee of Creditors. Notably, the Resolution Professional did not consent to act as the Liquidator, leading to the appointment of a separate Liquidator for the liquidation process. Each replacement was duly considered and approved by the Tribunal in compliance with the Code. Extension of CIRP Period: Several applications seeking an extension of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) period were filed by the Resolution Professionals. However, as the Tribunal had already passed the order for liquidation, these extension requests were deemed infructuous and disposed of accordingly. The Tribunal emphasized the mandatory provisions of the Code regarding the timeline for resolution and liquidation processes. The detailed judgment outlined the procedural history, decisions, and legal provisions governing the liquidation process of the Corporate Debtor, emphasizing compliance with the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The Tribunal's order for liquidation, appointment of a Liquidator, and handover of responsibilities from the Resolution Professional marked the conclusion of the proceedings, ensuring adherence to the statutory framework governing insolvency proceedings.
|