9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 244X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. 3 and 4 are dragged before this Bench for no fault of them. Consequent upon which, they are compelled to file their reply, causing loss not only in the form of pecuniary as well as mental and physical harassment. Such type of act is not expected from the RP. The instant application is dismissed as against the Respondent No. 3 and 4 with a cost of ₹ 30,000/- to be paid to the Respondent No. 3 only, as Respondent No. 4 neither shown his presence nor filed any reply. - IA 327 of 2020 in CP (IB) No. 44/NCLT/AHM/2018 - - - Dated:- 21-8-2020 - Manorama Kumari, Member (J) And Chocklingram Thirunavukkarasu, Member (T) For the Appellant : Pratik Thakkar, Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Advocates For the Respondent : Garima Malhotra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... who are not Suspended Management, is not only bad in the eye of law but is also misjoinder of parties. On receipt of notice, the Respondent No. 3, Operational Creditor, has appeared and filed her reply and has submitted that the application so filed by the Applicant under section 19 of the IB Code is not maintainable, as it deals with extension of the cooperation of the Corporate Debtor and its personnel i.e. promoters, directors etc. to the RP and does not pertain to direction against the third party, however, the RP under the guise of the instant application seeking direction against the Respondent No. 3 for payment of professional fees, which does not fall within the ambit of the section 19 of the IB Code. Heard the arguments of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is clear that on the garb of the instant application, which is filed under section 19 of the IB Code, RP is seeking direction for reimbursement of his payment from Respondent No. 3 and 4. The very impleadment of the Respondent No. 3 and 4 in the instant application is not only bad in the eye of law but is blatant misuse of the process of law and thereby, the Respondent No. 3 and 4 are dragged before this Bench for no fault of them. Consequent upon which, they are compelled to file their reply, causing loss not only in the form of pecuniary as well as mental and physical harassment. Such type of act is not expected from the RP. Under such circumstances, the instant application is dismissed as against the Respondent No. 3 and 4 with a cost ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
