9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 309X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng substitution of the Resolution Professional of JMEL - It is submitted by the Applicant herein that the present Resolution Professional is already a Resolution Professional in the matter of Affinity Beauty Salons Private Limited, Shivam Fragrances Pvt. Ltd. Chempharms Industries Private. Limited - majority of the workmen and employees of the Corporate Debtor are residents of Jaipur (Rajasthan) which makes it inconvenient for the workmen to approach the Resolution Professional who is located in Delhi - HELD THAT:- As per the provisions of Section 27(2) of IBC, 2016, this application is liable to be dismissed. Hence, the present application is dismissed. - IA No. 301/JPR/2019 and IA No. 46/JPR/2019 in CP No. (IB)-54(PB)/2018 - - - Dated:- 24-6-2022 - Deep Chandra Joshi, Member (J) And Raghu Nayyar, Member (T) For the Appellant : R.P. Singh, Ld. AAG, Prakul Khurana and Rishabh Khandelwa For the Respondents : Ashu Kansal and Sachin Gupta, Advs ORDER Deep Chandra Joshi, Member (J) 1. This Application bearing IA No. 301/JPR/2019 ('IA') is filed by the State of Rajasthan, through Officer in Charge Mr. Panchu Ram Sharma, Joint Director, Industries, (& ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt under the law, hence any or all meetings conducted in contravention of such mandatory provision under the law are void-ab-initio. b. The Applicant stated that under the present set of facts and circumstances of the case, the members of suspended board namely Mr. Sanjeev Saxena, Dr. K.K. Pathak, Mr. Shrimat Pandey, Mr. L.C. Jain, Mr. Yogesh Kumar Kamani, Mr. Rajeev Shrivastav, Mr. Kanhaiya Lal Sharma were required to be served with the appropriate notice of the meeting of CoC as provided under Section 24(3)(b) of the Code, 2016. Whereas none of the Directors received any notice of meeting regarding the first CoC. The notices for subsequent CoCs were issued to only two of the directors namely Mr. Sanjeev Saxena, Dr. K.K. Pathak on email. Notices to the remaining five directors namely, Mr. Shrimat Pandey, Mr. L.C. Jain, Mr. Yogesh Kumar Kamani, Mr. Rajeev Shrivastav, Mr. Kanhaiya Lal Sharma were not sent, whereas the notice mentioned the name of all the directors of the erstwhile/suspended board i.e. namely Mr. Sanjeev Saxena, Dr. K.K. Pathak, Mr. Shrimat Pandey, Mr. L.C. Jain, Mr. Yogesh Kumar Kamani, Mr. Rajeev Shrivastav and Mr. Kanhaiya Lal Sharma. It is submitted that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct the details of the Claims filed before the Resolution Professional available with the erstwhile directors of the Corporate Debtor, more particularly, Mr. Sanjeev Saxena, Dr. K.K. Pathak despite their repeated request. This right of inspection is available with the directors of the Corporate Debtor by virtue of Regulation 13 of the Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons Regulation, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the Regulation, 2016 ) as per which the Directors of Corporate Debtor are entitled for inspection of the claims of their own Creditors. In view of the same, a Letter dated 26.08.2019 was sent to the Resolution Professional with the hope and spirit of amicably resolving the present issue as recorded in the order sheet dated 07.08.2019, to which no reply has been received by the Applicant till date. During the course of arguments on 07.08.2019 before this Adjudicating Authority, it was suggested by the Resolution Professional that for getting access to the claims filed by the Financial Creditors, the state ought to become a member of CoC and upon becoming a member it would ipso facto have a right to inspect the claims filed by other financial creditors and o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anchu Ram Sharma, who has filed the instant application under reply is not duly authorized to do so because as per the website of Government of Rajasthan, CSR Portal, Mr. Panchu Ram Sharma is not enlisted as the Joint Director Officer in charge, industries. Thus, the authorised signatory is no longer the Joint director of the Corporate Debtor and is thereby unauthorised to file the instant application. Therefore, when the very authority of the authorised person is under challenge, the instant application under reply cannot be held to be maintainable and tenable in law. Mr. Panchu Ram Sharma, vide his letter dated 20.08.2019, addressed to the Respondent has submitted the Revised Claim on behalf of the State of Rajasthan and the same was provisionally admitted by the Respondent. It is submitted that in the said letter, Mr. Panchu Ram Sharma had addressed himself as Joint Director Industries Officer In charge, NCLT which is erroneously and patently incorrect as he is himself claiming to be Officer In charge of this Hon'ble Tribunal which is contrary to facts of the case. c. Respondent No. 1 has mentioned detailed description of the meeting of the CoC. (i) In the firs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8, passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in transferring the possession, assets, management of the Corporate Debtor, including the business record, the Respondent was compelled to prefer a Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 401/2019 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the Chairman and Managing Director of the Corporate Debtor, who are also the official of the Applicant, for have willfully violated the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and also preventing the Respondent from carrying out its duties in one way or the other. g. Respondent No. 1 has stated that, it is extremely vital to state herein that the Applicant issued a letter dated 06.03.2019 to the Registrar of Companies, Jaipur seeking changes in the name of the Directors of the Corporate Debtor. The said modification in the Board of Directors was being preferred on the basis of the election of the Co-operative Society, held on 24.09.2018. The Applicant by acting in contravention to the provisions of Sections 17 and 19 of the Code, issued such a letter, even when the power of the Board of Directors stands suspended and the same vest solely with the IRP/RP. It is pertinent to state herein that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that there is no collusion whatsoever between the Resolution Professional and the AARC as the appointment of the present Resolution Professional has been duly approved by this Hon'ble Adjudicating Authority. It is also stated that Dhir and Dhir Alchemist Asset Reconstruction Company are two different entities and their working is independent of each other. In the case of Affinity Beauty Salons Private Limited and Shivam Fragrances Private Limited, AARC was in no shape or form involved with the proceedings. The Insolvency proceedings qua hotel Gaudavan Pvt. Ltd. have already been resolved and the Resolution plan qua Hotel Gaudavan Pvt. Ltd. has been approved by Hon'ble National Company Law Tribunal, Principal Bench. Also, in the case of Haryana Steel and Alloys Limited ('Haryana Steel') an application for approval of the Resolution plan of the Corporate Debtor i.e., Haryana Steel has been filed and the same is pending for adjudication before Hon'ble NCLT Chandigarh Bench. It is finally submitted that the insolvency proceedings qua Dugal Projects Development Company Pvt. Ltd. is pending before the Adjudicating Authority. 6. The Applicant has filed additiona ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hout following any public process but by way of Pvt. negotiations with JFC. The said interim financing came to be approved by the CoC since the majority is controlled by Alchemist. This issue forms part of the minutes of the 9th Meeting of the Committee of Creditors of JMEL. f. From a perusal of the shareholding pattern of Shiva Consultants as on 31.03.2018, it becomes apparent that Mr. Alok Dhir and his related party are the shareholders, it is reiterated that Mr. Alok Dhir is the promoter of Alchemist, which was earlier known as Dhir Dhir Asset Reconstruction Co. Limited. Mr. Alok Dhir is also the managing partner of the law firm, Dhir Dhir Associates. Dhir Dhir Associates has been engaged by the Resolution Professional as its legal advisors. g. It is submitted that from a perusal of annual return, it becomes clear that Mr. Alok Dhir is not only the Director of Shiva Consultants but is also in the controlling position in as much as the annual return submitted with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs is signed by Mr. Alok Dhir. 7. The Respondent No. 1 Resolution Professional has filed written submissions vide Diary No. 1696/2022 dated 02.06.2022 stating that: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , fails to provide or update the relevant email address to the Resolution Professional the non-receipt of such notice by such participant of any meeting shall not invalidate the decisions taken at such meeting. d. The said purported application is being filed by the Government of Rajasthan being the Financial Creditor of the Corporate Debtor (member of CoC) but the purported allegations as levied in the said application seems to be levied by the Ex-Management. The Applicant herein being the Government of Rajasthan as per the convenience sometime plays a role of the Financial Creditor to the Corporate Debtor or sometime plays a role of the Ex-Management of the Corporate Debtor itself. e. It will not be out of place to mention herein that the Applicant, in his capacity of Ex-Management of the CD were seeking certain details from the IRP/RP. But as the right to requisite to Resolution Professional to furnish financial information in relation to the Corporate Debtor at any time during the CIRP is only with the CoC, all those information was provided only after induction of the Applicant as a Member of CoC after admission of their claim as Financial Creditor. f. The Reso ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the members of Committee of Creditors. In this case no such proposal of change of Resolution Professional has been placed before the CoC by the Applicant. The Applicant as only made allegations and failed to provide substantial proof of the same. The Hon'ble NCLAT has categorically held that if there is an explicit provision in the Code for change of Resolution Professional the same should be followed. It also held that the ingredients of Section 27 of the Code are self-explanatory and admits of no exception. Therefore, the present application filed by the State of Rajasthan is dismissed. 10. If the Applicant has any objections/complaints against the Resolution Professional, in that case the Applicant may approach the relevant authority under Section 217 218 of the Code. IA No. 46/JPR/2019: 11. This application has been filed by Metals Electrical Majdur Sangh seeking substitution of the Resolution Professional of JMEL. It is submitted by the Applicant herein that the present Resolution Professional is already a Resolution Professional in the matter of Affinity Beauty Salons Private Limited, Shivam Fragrances Pvt. Ltd. Chempharms Industries Private. Limited. Furt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
