9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (6) TMI 754X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Resolution Professional to file an application under Section 31 of the I B Code for placing the approved resolution plan before the Adjudicating Authority for approval which despite diligence and best efforts on his part was improbable as he was left only with one day to complete all legal formalities including seeking performance guarantee in terms of the approved resolution plan , further extension of time by 10 days enabling the Resolution Professional to seek approval of the resolution plan from the Adjudicating Authority is warranted. This is a fit case for exercising the jurisdiction by this Appellate Tribunal being an exceptional case to depart from the general rule of 330 days being outer limit prescribed under the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lan on the part of the Committee of Creditors is well within the extended timeline but since the Resolution Professional was merely left with one day for filing the application under Section 31 of the I B Code before the Adjudicating Authority, he could not lay the approved resolution plan under Section 31 of the I B Code before the Adjudicating Authority as he had to first comply with the legal formalities like seeking performance guarantee and other statutory compliances. It is submitted that the hardship encountered by the Resolution Professional is not on account of any lapse on his part but due to certain statutory compliances to be made, which are mandatory or without adhering to which the resolution plan could not be pla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judicating 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. It is further submitted that this Appellate Tribunal has in identical circumstances invoked Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules to mitigate the hardship encountered by the Resolution Professional . Reliance is placed upon the judgment of this Appellate Tribunal in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1425 of 2019 decided on 17th January, 2020. Having heard ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . We are also of the considered opinion that failure to exercise discretion in a matter of this nature would have serious implications imperilling the legitimate interests of all stakeholders and inevitable conclusion would be to push the Corporate Debtor into liquidation which has to be avoided at all costs. For the foregoing reasons, we find that the impugned order cannot be supported. Refusal to exercise discretion by the Adjudicating Authority, in our considered opinion, has resulted in miscarriage of justice and frustrating the object of the I B Code . We accordingly allow the appeal, set aside the impugned order and extend the period of corporate insolvency resolution process by 10 days till 17th February, 2020 i.e. the date o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
