9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 429X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 017. By admitting this application Mr. Arun Kumar Gupta was appointed as an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP in short) and subsequently he was appointed as Resolution Professional vide order dated 24.10.2017. The period of 180 days for submitting a resolution plan and closure of the CIRP in respect of the corporate debtor was expired on 19.02.2018 and the resolution professional short RP) has submitted the resolution plan in time. 2. The Resolution Professional Mr. Arun Kumar Gupta, in compliance of provisions of the Code and the Regulations, convened altogether Eight meetings of Committee of Creditors (CoC in short) and called for claims from various stakeholders by way of issuing public announcement. After consolidation of claims received from financial and operational creditors and after due deliberation of expression of interest submitted by the resolution applicants a resolution plan was finally approved by the CoC and it is that Resolution Plan, submitted before this Bench on 19.02.2018 ie. on the last day of expiry 180 days of CIRP. 3. When the Resolution Plan came up before this Bench for approval, two other resolution applicants whose claims were rejected by the CoC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on Professional, Ld. Pr. C.S. appearing for the Resolution Applicant in CA No.172/KB/2018, CA No 205 /KB/ 2018, Ld. Counsel for the workmen and Financial Creditors and perused the records along with the plan submitted by the Resolution Professional dated 19.02.2018. 7. The Resolution Professional filed his final reports on the basis of a Resolution Plan of CP Ispat Private Limited approved by the CoC at a voting shares of 100% in the meeting held on 14.02.2018. 8. I have gone through the reports of the resolution professional as well as the plan and the relevant documents. So also CA No.172of 2018 and CA No.205 of 2018 was heard along with the CP. Upon hearing the argument advanced on the side of the Ld. Resolution Professional and going through the final report filed by the Resolution Professional, I am satisfied that the Ld. Resolution Professional before getting approval of the Resolution Plan by the CoC meets all the requirements of Sub-Section (2) of Section 30 of the I&B Code, 2016 and the Ld. Resolution Professional gave a certificate as per Regulation 39(4)(a) of IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016. The report reveals all data rega ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IB) No.205/KB /2018 came up for consideration before this Bench subsequent to the final hearing of the Resolution Plan approved by the CoC. On a careful reading of the report of the resolution professional what I understood is that the Resolution applicant in the instant application No. CA(IB) No.205/IB/2018 namely Prakash Chand Jain of Simplex Trades and Industries seems to have filed the Resolution Plan one day prior to the CoC meeting held on 14.02.2018 and upon the following reasons highlighted by the CoC it rejected the Resolution Plan. (a) the Resolution applicant was late in its submission of the Resolution Plan as the final cut off date fixed by the CoC for the purpose was 19.01.2018; (b) the applicant did not undergo the due diligence process to ascertain the eligibility of the resolution applicant and his credentials were still unknown; (c) Information Memorandum had not been shared with them yet by the Resolution Professional. What was more surprising to the CoC was that despite of not having the Information Memorandum at their disposal, how could the resolution applicant prepare and submit a resolution plan. It seems to the CoC that the requisite information was l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Resolution Professional and the decision of the CoC in the meetings held on 19.01.2018, 02.02.2018 and 14.02.2018 it appears to me that the resolution applicant's whose Resolution Plan has been approved was considered together with the complainant resolution plan and no data furnished to me that the bid amount offered by the complainant was known to the resolution professional and he had communicated it to the applicant whose plan was approved. However, by considering the decisions of the CoC and that the complainant submitted its revised plan belatedly ie after the submission of the revised plan by the CP. Ispat Pvt. Ltd the allegation levelled by the complaint is found devoid of any merit. Considering the merits of allegation levelled against the Resolution Professional, it appears to me that an investigation on the basis of the grievance, if any, suffered by the functioning of RP cannot be ordered in the case in hand. Because the complainant can approach IBBI under section 217 of I&B code read with regulations of IBBI (Inspection and Investigation) Regulations,2017 for it recourse to have investigation as prayed for. Upon the above said observation I am holding that CA.IB ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of RP in the case in hand is an example. It read as follows:- (i) The payment of resolution process cost would be paid in priority to all other debts of corporate debtor (DJSIPL). The said amount would be Rs. 0.25 crores or as approved by the CoC. (ii) Approved insolvency resolution process costs- The total expenses were Rs. 60.6 lakhs till date out of which Rs. 15.4 Lakhs was unpaid. The total costs included Rs. 9.4 lakhs were incurred in defending the RP and the CoC against illegal application made by Mr. Sunil Jain (a director of the corporate debtor). The same was perused and approved by the CoC. (No orders brought to my notice that Mr.Sunil jain moved any illegal application against CIRP). (iii) The fee payable to the forensic auditor and cost relates to the application filed under section 43, 50 and 66 of I & B Code, 2016, will form part of the IRP costs. (iv) The CoC voted to unanimously approve additional lump sum fee of Rs. 7,50,000/- . 23. The CoC members are Assets Reconstruction Company (India) Limited, (ARCL), Panjab National Bank, Uco Bank and West Bengal Financial Corporation. Fixation of lump sum fee is on what basis is nowhere stated in the report. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2018, who is one among the defeated applicants for the reason of late submission of revised plan. It is a circumstance behind the filing of the said CA raising serious allegation in the process of approval of the Plan by the CoC. 27. In the above said peculiar circumstance the decision of the ARCIL leads to certain shadow of doubts behind the rejection of the plan of the said applicant. However, this Bench power to interfere with the statutory right of the CoC to either approve or reject a resolution plan by a vote of not Les than 75% of voting share of the financial creditors I am liable to approve the resolution plan which was approved with 100% voting share and meets the requirements of sub section (2) of section 30 of the I&B Code. 28. In view of the above, and upon finding that none of the objections raised by any of the objectors against the Resolution Plan submitted by CP Ispat Private Limited stand proved with supporting evidence, it appears to me that the resolution plan of CP Ispat Pvt. Ltd is to be approved as per Sub-Section (1) of Section 31 of the I&B Code 2016. Accordingly, the Resolution Plan submitted by CP Ispat Private Limited is hereby approved upon the follow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
