9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (6) TMI 602 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcySeeking exclusion of period of 140 days from the CIRP of the Corporate Debtor - Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 read with rule 11 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 - HELD THAT - The erstwhile Director had filed an Interlocutory Application for extension of time period wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court vide Order dated 28.07.2020 in Civil Appeal No(s). 2211/2020 extended the time for a period of two months subject to deposition 50% amount within one month and remaining within the next 30 days and further stated that no further extension will be granted - The applicant states that this application is being filed for exclusion of 140 days from the CIRP period i.e., the lockdown period starting from 25.03.2020 to 02.06.2020 (69 days) and further the period from 18.06.2020 to 28.08.2020 (71 days) due to operation of Interim Order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court vide Order dated 18.06.2020. The applicant states that this application is being filed for exclusion of 140 days from the CIRP period i.e., the lockdown period starting from 25.03.2020 to 02.06.2020 (69 days) and further the period from 18.06.2020 to 28.08.2020 (71 days) due to operation of Interim Order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court vide Order dated 18.06.2020. The loss of 140 days in the CIRP period is excluded - Application allowed.
Issues:
Application under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code seeking exclusion of 140 days from the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) period. Analysis: The application was filed seeking reliefs under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and Rule 11 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016. The applicant, the Resolution Professional, sought exclusion of 140 days from the CIRP period of the Corporate Debtor. The CIRP was initiated against the Corporate Debtor by an Order dated 03.10.2019, appointing the Interim Resolution Professional. Public announcements were made, and Expression of Interests were invited from Resolution Applicants. In the 5th Committee of Creditors Meeting, plans submitted by Resolution Applicants were considered. An Interlocutory Application was filed for a 90-day extension in the CIRP period, which was granted by the Adjudicating Authority. The erstwhile Director of the Corporate Debtor had challenged the initial Order before the NCLAT and the Supreme Court, leading to directions for payment. Despite extensions granted by the Supreme Court, full payment was not made within the specified period. The applicant sought exclusion of 140 days from the CIRP period, including the lockdown period and the period due to the Interim Order passed by the Supreme Court. The Tribunal allowed the application, excluding the 140 days from the CIRP period. Consequently, IA No. 265/CB/2020 connected with CP (IB) No. 54/CTB/2019 was allowed. This judgment highlights the procedural aspects of the CIRP under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, including the role of the Resolution Professional, Committee of Creditors Meetings, challenges by stakeholders, and the authority's power to grant extensions in the resolution process. The exclusion of specific days from the CIRP period due to exceptional circumstances, such as lockdown and court orders, showcases the flexibility within the legal framework to address unforeseen delays and challenges in insolvency proceedings.
|
