9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (11) TMI 66 - AT - Insolvency and BankruptcyMaintainability of application - extension of the period of completion of Insolvency Resolution Process - Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - HELD THAT - On the ground that the Resolution Professional has wrongly decided the claims of the Appellant Banks by rejecting their claims, the application under Section 60(5) was preferred by the Appellants, which according to the Appellants have not been properly adjudicated by the Adjudicating Authority. The impugned order dated 25th July, 2018 fell for consideration before this Appellate Tribunal in COMMITTEE OF CREDITORS OF AMTEK AUTO LTD. AND LIBERTY HOUSE GROUP PTE LTD. VERSUS MR. DINKAR T. VENKATASUBRAMANIAN ORS. AND LIBERTY HOUSE GROUP PTE LTD. VERSUS THE COMMITTEE OF CREDITORS OF AMTEK AUTO LTD. ANR. 2019 (8) TMI 877 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI wherein this Appellate Tribunal noticed that the plan which was approved in favour of M/s. Liberty House Group Pte Ltd. ( Successful Resolution Applicant ) was not acted upon. When the question of implementation of the approved Resolution Plan of M/s. Liberty House Group Pte Ltd. was taken up by the Resolution Professional , it was stated that in spite of e-mail sent on 5th September, 2018 and detailed e-mail on 12th September, 2018, no favourable response was received by M/s. Liberty House Group Pte Ltd. whose plan has been approved by impugned order dated 25th July, 2018. The liquidator is now required to collate and settle the claim(s) as empowered under Section 35 (j), after access of information under Section 37 thereafter required to consolidate the claim under Section 38 and after verification of claims under Section 39 may either admit or reject the claim or part thereof under Section 40. Thereafter, if any person aggrieved against the decision of the liquidator may prefer an appeal under Section 42 before the Adjudicating Authority. It is not required to pass any order on merit as the matter is required to be determined afresh by the liquidator - appeal disposed off.
Issues Involved:
1. Extension of the Insolvency Resolution Process period. 2. Rejection of claims by the Resolution Professional. 3. Approval and implementation of the Resolution Plan. 4. Liquidation of the Corporate Debtor. 5. Rights of the claimants post-liquidation order. Detailed Analysis: 1. Extension of the Insolvency Resolution Process Period: Pursuant to an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("I&B Code") filed by 'Corporation Bank,' the 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process' was initiated against 'Amtek Auto Limited' on 25th July 2018. The Resolution Professional sought an extension of the period for completion of the Insolvency Resolution Process based on a decision taken in the 5th Meeting of the 'Committee of Creditors' held on 6th December 2017, and the period was extended by another 90 days by order dated 17th January 2018. 2. Rejection of Claims by the Resolution Professional: Several banks, including 'Kotak Mahindra Bank,' 'ICICI Bank,' 'IDBI Bank,' and 'Central Bank of India,' filed claims pursuant to a public announcement on 10th August 2017. The Resolution Professional rejected these claims or parts thereof. The banks then filed applications under sub-section (5) of Section 60 of the 'I&B Code' for reconsideration. The Adjudicating Authority did not grant any relief, leading the banks to appeal. 3. Approval and Implementation of the Resolution Plan: The 'Resolution Plan' for 'Amtek Auto Ltd.' was approved but not disclosed to 'Madhur Engineers Pvt. Ltd.,' an 'Operational Creditor,' who was aggrieved by the impugned order dated 25th July 2018. The Appellate Tribunal noted that the plan approved in favor of 'M/s. Liberty House Group Pte Ltd.' was not acted upon. Despite attempts to engage 'Liberty House Group Pte Ltd.,' no favorable response was received, leading to further complications. 4. Liquidation of the Corporate Debtor: The Appellate Tribunal, by its judgment dated 16th August 2019, observed that since more than 270 days had elapsed, the Adjudicating Authority had no option but to pass an order of liquidation. The Tribunal emphasized that the liquidator must follow the procedures laid down under the 'I&B Code' and the Companies Act, 2013. 5. Rights of the Claimants Post-Liquidation Order: Given the Tribunal's order for liquidation, the claims of the appellants were to be addressed by the liquidator. The liquidator is required to collate and settle claims under Sections 35, 37, 38, 39, and 40 of the 'I&B Code.' Aggrieved parties may appeal the liquidator's decisions under Section 42 before the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal granted liberty to the appellants to file their respective claims before the liquidator, who will decide in accordance with the provisions and the Supreme Court's decision in "Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr." Conclusion: The appeals were disposed of with the observation that the liquidator would now determine the claims afresh. The appellants were given liberty to file their claims before the liquidator, who is to decide based on the relevant legal provisions and precedents. No costs were awarded.
|
