9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (8) TMI 1059 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyAppointment of proposed IRP - HELD THAT - It is observed that First Schedule under Regulation 7(2)(h) of the IBBI (Insolvency Professional) Regulations, 2016 at point 15 of the Code of Conduct for Insolvency Professionals, which states that An insolvency professional must make efforts to ensure that all communication to the stakeholders, whether in the form of notices, reports, updates, directions, or clarifications, is made well in advance and in a manner which is simple, clear, and easily understood by the recipients''. The proposed IRP, Mr. Deepankur Sharma, in the present application is directed to adhere to the aforementioned Code of Conduct before giving his consent in an application under the Code - Since, no other IRP has been suggested thus, under sub section (4) of Section 9 of the Code, the Adjudicating Authority has to forward the name of Resolution Professional proposed to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India for its confirmation and shall make such appointment after the confirmation of Board. The term of appointment of Mr. Anil Arora shall be in accordance with the provisions of Section 16(5) of the Code - Application allowed.
Issues:
Application for replacement of Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) due to surrender of license. Analysis: The application was filed under Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules, 2016, seeking amendments in an order dated 28.06.2022 for the replacement of the IRP. The applicant, an operational creditor, requested the appointment of a new IRP due to the surrender of the license by the previously appointed IRP, Mr. Manish Aggarwal, on 10.01.2022. The proposed IRP, Mr. Deepankur Sharma, initially consented but later withdrew, citing the lack of assets of the Corporate Debtor. The Tribunal noted the importance of effective communication to stakeholders by Insolvency Professionals as per the Code of Conduct. As no other IRP was suggested, the Tribunal proceeded to appoint Mr. Anil Arora as the Interim Resolution Professional. The Tribunal emphasized compliance with the Code and rules governing the profession of the Interim Resolution Professional. Mr. Anil Arora was directed to file his consent within a week and assume powers over the Corporate Debtor's management. The Interim Resolution Professional was mandated to prepare an inventory of the Corporate Debtor's assets, follow ethical standards, make a public announcement of the insolvency process, and form a Committee of Creditors within thirty days. Additionally, cooperation from the Corporate Debtor's management and promoters was required to facilitate the resolution process. Furthermore, the Tribunal directed the petitioner to deposit funds with the Interim Resolution Professional for immediate expenses related to the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The deposited amount would be reimbursed by the Committee of Creditors. The Tribunal ordered the communication of the decision to both parties and the Interim Resolution Professional promptly. In conclusion, the application for the replacement of the IRP was allowed, and Mr. Anil Arora was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional with specific directives to manage the affairs of the Corporate Debtor in accordance with the Code and regulations. The Tribunal ensured compliance with procedural requirements and emphasized the importance of stakeholder cooperation for a successful resolution process.
|
