9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1192X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s application seeking extension of moratorium period, having been filed beyond the period of 180 days, is not maintainable and this Adjudicating Authority is of the considered view that, even otherwise, there are no grounds to extend the period of moratorium. Hence, this application is dismissed. - IA 393/2017 in C.P. (I.B) No. 19/7/NCLT/AHM/2017 - - - Dated:- 22-12-2017 - MR. BIKKI RAVEENDRA BABU AND MS. MANORAMA KUMARI, JJ. For The Applicant : Mr. Akshat Khare For The Respondent : Mr. Saurabh Soparkar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Monaal Davawala And Mr. Aditya Krishnamurthy, Advocates ORDER Per: Bikki Raveendra Babu, Member (J) 1. The Committee of Creditors (CoC) of Asian Natural Resources India Limited, in its 2nd meeting held on 23rd November, 2017, authorized the Resolution Professional (RP), Mr. Anshuman Chaturvedi, to seek extension of moratorium period of the Corporate Debtor beyond 180 days on the following grounds:- (a) That this Adjudicating Authority, vide its order dated 6th November, 2017 passed on the application of Vitol S.A., being IA No.230 of 2017 in CP(IB) No.l9/7/NCLT/AHM/2017, directed the Resolution Professional to examine the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Interim Resolution Professional filed his report dated 13.06.2017 before this Adjudicating Authority giving the list of Financial Creditors and their claim amounts and constitution of Committee of Creditors. 5. The Interim Resolution Professional filed another report on 05.09.2017 stating that the first meeting of the Committee of Creditors was held on 20th June, 2017 and all the seven Financial Creditors, who are the members of the Committee, were present through their representatives. As per the report of the IRP dated 5.9.2017, one of the items of the agenda in the first meeting of the Committee of Creditors was to discuss regarding appointment of a new Resolution Professional in the place of the IRP. The IRP in the said report stated that a decision has been taken to appoint some other Professional in his place. It is stated by the IRP that the said meeting was adjourned and the adjourned meeting was held on 20th July, 2017 at Indore. The IRP further stated in his report that the appointment of Resolution Professional required approval of 75% of the total votes. Six members of the Committee holding 65% of the total votes were in favour of continuation of the IRP, however St ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... turvedi came to be appointed as Resolution Professional. 8. The Resolution Professional convened meeting of the Committee of Creditors on 23.11.2017. In the meeting of the Committee of Creditors held on 23.11.2017, a resolution was passed authorising the Resolution Professional Mr. Anshuman Chaturvedi to seek extension of moratorium period beyond 180 days. Thereafter, on 30th November, 2017, this application came to be filed seeking extension of time. 9. The grounds on which this application is filed have already been narrated in the first paragraph of this order. 10. The main contention of the learned counsel appearing for the applicant is that this Adjudicating Authority, in its order dated 16.11.2017 passed in IA No.369, permitted the Resolution Professional, after his appointment, to file an application under Section 12(2) of the IB Code, if so authorised by the Committee of Creditors. 11. It is a fact that this Adjudicating Authority observed that the Resolution Professional is entitled to file an application under Section 12(2) of the IB Code, if so authorised by the Committee of Creditors. This observation was made while rejecting the request of the Committee of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng of the Committee of Creditors, it appears that no efforts were made at least to obtain valuation of assets of the Corporate Debtor. It is pertinent to mention here that one of the Operational Creditors, i.e. Vitol S.A., whose claim is more than the claim of all the Financial Creditors put together, has not been given notice of any of the meetings of the Committee of Creditors. In fact, this Adjudicating Authority in its order in IA. 230 of 2017 directed the Committee of Creditors to give notice to the Operational Creditors, including Vitol S.A. and consider their objections, if any raised by them. In spite of such direction by this Adjudicating Authority, the Interim Resolution Professional or the Committee of Creditors did not choose to give any notice to Vitol S.A., the Operational Creditor, even for the meeting of Committee of Creditors held on 23.11.2017. There are serious allegations of collusion between Financial Creditors and Corporate Debtor to defeat the huge claim of the Operational Creditor in IA No.230 of 2017. Moreover, no efforts were made by the Committee of Creditors through the Interim Resolution Professional to take any steps in the Resolution Process. More so, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
