9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1033X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de thereunder to appreciate the importance of time in a CIRP and Mr. Vats shall not seek or accept any assignment or render any services under the Code till he complies with the direction as at (i) above. He shall, however, continue to conduct and complete the assignments / processes he has in hand as on date of this order. - No. IBBI/DC/14/2019-20 - - - Dated:- 21-8-2019 - Dr. M. S. Sahoo, Chairperson, IBBI And Dr. Mukulita Vijayawargiya, Whole Time Member, IBBI Order In the matter of Mr. Rishi Prakash Vats, Insolvency Professional under regulation 11 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Professionals) Regulations, 2016 read with section 220 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. For Appearance at Hearings Represented by Noticee None Mr. Rishi Prakash Vats, Self Mr. Apoorva Sarvaria, Advocate Bo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2.3 Taking note of the order dated 26th April, 2018 of the AA, the Board sought certain clarifications from Mr. Vats and the financial creditor, which had applied under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code) for initiation of CIRP of M/s Rana Global Limited. After considering the response of Mr. Vats, vide his mails dated 13th June, 2018 and 27th July, 2018, and also the inputs of the financial creditor vide its email dated 18th August, 2018, the Board issued the SCN alleging certain contraventions and seeking a written reply within 21 days of the date of the SCN and offering him an opportunity of personal hearing before this Disciplinary Committee (DC). 2.4 Thereafter, Mr. Vats filed an application before the AA seeking expunction of the observations made against him by the AA in its order dated 26th April, 2018 and a direction to the Board not to proceed in the matter against him. The AA disposed of the said application vide its order dated 17th September, 2018, with the following observations: Vide the present application, the RP submits that the aforesaid observations made against him, be expunged as the delay was n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I be quashed and the matter be treated as closed. 2.9 Aggrieved by the order dated 5th February, 2019 of the AA, the Board filed an appeal before the Hon ble Appellate Authority. After hearing the parties, the Appellate Authority, vide its order dated 11th July, 2019, observed as under: 3. On hearing the IBBI, we are of the view that once a disciplinary proceeding is initiated by the IBBI on the basis of evidence on record, it is for the Disciplinary Authority, i.e., IBBI to close the proceeding or pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Such power having been vested with IBBI and in absence of any power with the Adjudicating Authority/ (National Company Law Tribunal), the Adjudicating Authority cannot quash the proceeding, even if proceeding is initiated at the instance and recommendation made by the Adjudicating Authority/ National Company Law Tribunal ... 7. For the reason aforesaid, we set aside the last portion of the impugned order dated 5th February, 2019 relating to quashing of all disciplinary proceedings. The matter is remitted to the IBBI to pass appropriate order taking into consideration the reference of in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (d) The Board moved an application on 20th November, 2018. After hearing the parties, the AA disposed of the application vide order dated 5th February, 2019. (e) The Board filed an appeal on 25th March, 2019 against the order dated 5th February, 2019. After hearing the parties, the Appellate Authority disposed of the appeal vide order dated 11th July, 2019. (f) The DC heard Mr. Vats and his learned Counsel on 14th August, 2019. It is passing this order today, within seven days of the hearing. 4. According to regulation 11(7) of the IBBI (Insolvency Professionals) Regulations, 2016, the DC shall dispose of a show cause notice by a reasoned order in adherence to principles of natural justice, and after considering submissions, if any, made by the IP. Unfortunately, Mr. Vats insists that the SCN issued to him must be disposed of differently than in the manner provided for in the law. It is important to deal with the submissions made by Mr. Vats at the hearing on 14th August, 2019. 4.1 An IP is a key institution of the insolvency regime. He is the beacon of hope for the person in financial distress and its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e DC on 26th October, 2018. He refused to make submissions on merits, before the DC on 14th August, 2019, even after the Appellate Authority held that it is for the Board to close a disciplinary proceeding or pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Such conduct on the part of Mr. Vats evidences his contempt of law and the authorities. 4.6 Mr. Vats insisted that the Board is bound by the judicial orders of the AA and the Appellate Authority and it cannot make independent findings/application of mind. The law nowhere requires that a show cause notice issued by the Board shall be considered by the AA / Appellate Authority first and the DC shall then adopt their findings in its orders and close the disciplinary proceeding. It does not require that in a disciplinary proceeding / for disposal of a show cause notice, the DC is bound by the orders of the AA / Appellate Authority. On the contrary, the law requires a reasoned order of the DC for disposal of a show cause notice. The DC cannot substitute its own finding / judgment by the finding / judgement of AA / Appellate authority, which has no jurisdiction in the matter. Thus, Mr. Vats made a serious attempt to der ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot take any steps as IRP. It is difficult to appreciate such a stance by an IP, who had given consent to act as IRP of the CIRP. His name is correctly written in Para 6 of the said order. Though Rishi Kumar Vats was written instead of Rishi Prakash Vats in Para 9 of the said order, the address, registration number and e-mail were correctly written. Such a typographical error cannot be an excuse for not commencing a time-bound processes under the Code. It is perplexing that Mr. Vats himself writes his address differently and his name with different spellings. For his registration with the Board, he used: Mr. Rishi Prakash Vats, VGC Law Firm, 19 Park Area, Karol Bagh, New Delhi - 110005 . He is required to use his name and address, as registered with the Board, in the CIRPs conducted by him under the Code. In the instant CIRP, he has, however, used the name and address: Mr. Rishi Parkash Vats, Suit No.1, 19 Park Area, Karol Bagh, New Delhi - 110005 . He is enrolled as Rishi Parkash Vats with his IPA. For his legal practice and income tax returns, he uses: Rishi Parkash Vats . In the circumstances, not commencing the CIRP on account of a typographical error at one place in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
