9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 1484X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e CoC is required to determine in accordance with law. Thus, the Hon'ble NCLAT did not interfere with the impugned order passed by this Bench. The CoC is directed to make payment of the dues as per the above stated direction of the NCLAT read with the direction of this Adjudicating Authority, it is to be complied within two weeks, i.e. from the date of receipt of an authentic copy of this order. In case there remains any dispute, then the retiring IRP is at liberty to approach this Court. Nothing adverse is available on record to oppose the approval of the Resolution of the CoC for appointing new RP, Mr. Mangesh V. Kekre - Application allowed. - IA 606 of 2019 in CP (IB) 159 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 7-11-2019 - Harihar Prakash Ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Adjudicating Authority, it is to be complied within two weeks, i.e. from the date of receipt of an authentic copy of this order. In case there remains any dispute, then the retiring IRP is at liberty to approach this Court. Having directed so to the CoC, in our view nothing adverse is available on record to oppose the approval of the Resolution of the CoC for appointing new RP, Mr. Mangesh V. Kekre. Hence, IA No. 679 of 2019 is allowed and stands disposed of. In addition to the above retiring IRP, Mr. Rajesh Lohia, has further filed IA No. 606 of 2019, alleged breach of order/and direction of the Co-ordinate Bench passed in order dated 06.09.2019. The learned counsel appearing for Respondent No. 5 today files Vakalatnama and seeks ti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oth the Financial Creditors were present and it was decided to change the Interim Resolution Professional. ii. The Committee of Creditors filed the present I.A. No. 679/2019 and submitted that during the meeting of first Committee of Creditors, the Interim Resolution Professional demanded ₹ 2.50 lakhs per month as his fees plus expenses, which he alleged to have been agreed between him and the Applicant (Operational Creditor) of CP(IB) of 159 of 2019 from the date of his appointment till his continuance as Interim Resolution Professional. As stated by the Committee of Creditors, the amount of fee was too high and not agreeable. The Committee of Creditors, without prejudice to its right to change the Interim Resolution Professional, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay be allowed and the Financial Creditors may be punished for not making payment of fees etc. vii. Further, one of the Financial Creditor, Intec Capital Limited preferred a Company Appeal No.1059 of 2019 before the Hon'ble NCLAT against the Interim Resolution Professional, Corporate Debtor and Operational Creditor and challenged the order dtd: 06.09.2019 passed by this Adjudicating Authority, wherein while deciding the appeal on 16.10.2019, the Hon'ble NCLAT held that - From the aforesaid order, we find that 'Committee of Creditors' have been directed to clear the dues of the 'Interim Resolution Professional' which the 'Committee of Creditors' are required to determine in. accordance with law. Therefo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Interim Resolution Professional is to be paid by the Applicant (Operational Creditor) itself and not by the Committee of Creditors. xii. Further, as per the recent IBBI Circular, the Interim Resolution Professionals were recommended to structure their fees in a reasonable way and to act as per the moral code of conduct and ethics and not indulge in undue gains at the cost of already distressed assets. xiii. It is further observed that application has been admitted on 21.06.2019 and Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process started. Thereafter there is no progress in Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. In the meantime, four months have already been lapsed. The entire IBC process is derailed apparently on account of the IRP fee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
