9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (10) TMI 263 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyExclusion of 60 days from CIRP period - section 12(2) of Insolvency Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - HELD THAT - The Adjudicating Authority can exclude a certain period for the purpose of counting total period of CIRP, if circumstances justify such exclusion. Here is the case, where considerable time i.e. 79 days has been lost in the CIRP period. Necessarily some period is to be excluded from the CIRP, otherwise CoC cannot go ahead with the CIRP. Out of 79 days period lost in the CIRP, the Resolution Professional has requested only 60 days' time for evaluation of EoI as date of receipt of EoI was extended by CoC up to 13.01.2020. Further as stated by the Resolution Professional, the Special Audit period was also extended up to 28.02.2020. So these are justifiable grounds for excluding some period from the CIRP, since CoC could not complete the above tasks well within time. Thus, there are grounds to exclude 60 days from CIRP in the interest of justice. Application is allowed by excluding 60 days for the purpose of counting period of CIRP and thereby allowing Resolution Professional/CoC a further 60 days with effect from 02.02.2020 to complete the CIRP within the period allowed.
Issues Involved:
1. Application for exclusion of time lost in litigations during Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Detailed Analysis: 1. The Tribunal had earlier admitted a petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, appointing an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) who was later confirmed as the Resolution Professional for the Corporate Debtor. The Resolution Professional filed an Interlocutory Application seeking exclusion of time lost in litigations for completing the CIRP process by a specified date. 2. The Application detailed various instances where time was lost during the CIRP period due to non-cooperation from the Corporate Debtor, pending interlocutory applications, and stay orders. The Resolution Professional highlighted that these delays hindered compliance with the mandatory requirements and timelines under the Code, resulting in a total loss of 79 days. 3. The Resolution Professional sought exclusion of 60 days from the CIRP period to compensate for the time lost in litigations, emphasizing the need for additional time to complete pending tasks essential for the resolution process. The Tribunal was informed that the CIRP period had already been extended by 90 days, and the requested exclusion was crucial for the effective completion of the process. 4. Referring to relevant legal provisions and precedents, including a judgment by the Hon'ble NCLAT, the Tribunal acknowledged the authority to exclude certain periods from the CIRP under unforeseen circumstances. The Resolution Professional's arguments regarding the justifiability of excluding time for completing essential tasks were considered valid, aligning with the principles of justice and practicality. 5. After a thorough review of the grounds presented and the necessity for additional time to address pending matters, the Tribunal granted the Application, allowing the exclusion of 60 days from the CIRP period. This decision aimed to facilitate the Resolution Professional and the Committee of Creditors in completing the CIRP effectively within the revised timeline, ensuring the orderly resolution of the Corporate Debtor's insolvency. 6. The Tribunal directed the Resolution Professional to continue discharging duties during the extended period, emphasizing the importance of utilizing the additional time granted judiciously to advance the resolution process and uphold the objectives of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
|
