Alok Industries Limited vs Ashvanee Kumar Singh And Ors. & Ors

In the matter of: Alok Industries Ltd. ...Appellant

Vs. Ashvanee Kumar Singh & Ors. ...Respondents

Present: Appellant: Ms. Petrushka Des Gupta, Mr. Mridul Yadav, Mr. Anand Singh Sengar, Advocates Ms. Sayalee Dolas, Advocate Respondent:

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode) 30.06.2026 - This Appeal is directed by the successful resolution applicant

challenging an Order of the Adjudicating Authority impleading the resolution

applicant in an application for initiating contempt filed by certain workmen of

the erstwhile corporate debtor had taken out after the plan was implemented.

2. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the entire amount due

payable to the workmen under the plan has been fully paid and the very

application which some of the workmen have now filed and pending adjudication

before the Adjudicating Authority is misconceived. He submitted that given the

fact that the plan has been fully implemented, the resolution professional might

not have any documents to defend the action. Indeed, the appellant itself has

filed all necessary documents before the Adjudicating Authority for it to decide

the issue before it. In the circumstances, impleading the resolution professional

in an application is not required. But, the Adjudicating Authority vide its Order

dated 18.06.2026 has required the RP to appear before him to explain. 2

3. Whether the workmen have been fully paid in terms of the resolution plan

is something which the Adjudicating Authority may have to decide. And the

resolution professional in the context cannot be said to be an unnecessary

addenda to the proceeding as he has the responsibility and duty to explain the

matter. Inasmuch as the resolution professional was also the Chairman of the

Monitoring Committee, a duty is cast upon him to explain the matter before the

Adjudicating Authority. In view of the discussion we have herein recorded, we

find that there is no merit in the appeal. The appeal is dismissed.

4. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the plan was fully

implemented by 14th September, 2020 and the Contempt Application No.15 of

2023 is pending before the Adjudicating Authority for almost four years now.

5. We, therefore, require the learned Adjudicating Authority to expedite the

hearing of Contempt Application No.15 of 2023 and dispose of the same as early

as possible but not later than two months from today.

[Justice N. Seshasayee] Member (Judicial)

[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical)

[Indevar Pandey] Member (Technical) rs/beena