9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 617X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by RP has not been supported [confirmed final account and even 'by the resolution of the CoC. In this case, we are faced with the difficulty that CIRP period of 330 days has been over on 05.03.2020. Accordingly, RP has filed application for liquidation of the Corporate Debtor, but due to the declaration of 'Lock Down,' that application remained pending. In our considered view, since, the RP and CoC have received the resolution plans of one M/s. Alkon Projects, it would be appropriate if we direct the RP and CoC to consider the resolution plans first - in view of facts that the grievances of Some of the Home-Buyers/Plot-Holders can be addressed to. It is seen from the record that a period of 172 days was wasted due to pendency ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e passed and the RP may be directed to revive the CIRP of the Corporate Debtor afresh. 3. IA No. 116 of 2020 is filed by RP with some of the selfsame prayers that are made in LA. No. 114 of 2020. The RP further requested that period of 172 days wasted in appointing an authorised representative of the Financial Creditor be excluded from the total CIRP period and a further period of 44 days, be excluded because during that period CIRP was stayed by this Adjudicating Authority. He also prayed as per the Regulation 40(c) of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (CIRP for the Corporate Person) Regulation, 2016, a period of COVID- 19 pandemic may be excluded from counting the CIRP period. 4. Since common prayers are made in both the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as the applicant in LA. No. 116 of 2020 that above period of six months the meetings of CoC could not be held for want of corum as prescribed under Regulation 22 of IBBI Regulations, 2016. On 03.01.2020, the RP filed application under Section 33(1) of the I.B. Code for passing an order of liquidation of the Corporate Debtor (IA. No.26 of 2020) stating inter-alia that the CIRP period of 300 days was to complete on 05.02.2020. He did not receive any resolution plan. That application came for consideration before this authority on 05.03.2020. The Bench found that Form-H (final report and account) was not produced on record. Hence, this Bench directed the RP to submit Form-H. The matter was adjourned to 16.04.2020. 9. The record furt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Debtor. Moreover, the application for liquidation of the Corporate Debtor filed by RP has not been supported [confirmed final account and even 'by the resolution of the CoC. 14. In this case, we are faced with the difficulty that CIRP period of 330 days has been over on 05.03.2020. Accordingly, RP has filed application for liquidation of the Corporate Debtor, but due to the declaration of 'Lock Down,' that application remained pending. In our considered view, since, the RP and CoC have received the resolution plans of one M/s. Alkon Projects, it would be appropriate if we direct the RP and CoC to consider the resolution plans first - in view of facts that the grievances of Some of the Home-Buyers/Plot-Holders can be a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in legal proceedings cannot possibly harm a litigant if the Tribunal itself cannot take up the litigant's case within the requisite period for no fault of the litigant, a provision which mandatorily requires the CIRP to end by a certain date without any exception thereto - may well be an excessive interference With a litigant's fundamental right to nonarbitrary treatment under Article 14 and an excessive, arbitrary and therefore unreasonable restriction on a litigant's fundamental right to carry on business under Article of the Constitution of India. This being the case, we would ordinarily have struck down the provision in its entirety. However, that would then throw the baby out with the bath water, Inasmuch as the time taken ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pen in such cases for the Adjudicating Authority and/or Appellate Tribunal to extend time beyond 330 days. Likewise, even under the newly added proviso to Section 12, if by reason of all the aforesaid factors the grace period of 90 days from the date of commencement of the Amending Act of 2019 is exceeded, there again a discretion can be exercised by the Adjudicating Authority and/or Appellate Tribunal to further extend time keeping the aforesaid parameters in mind. It is only in such exceptional cases that time can be extended the general rule being that 330 days is the outer limit within which resolution of the stressed assets of the corporate debtor must take place beyond which the corporate debtor is to be driven into liquidation. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
