Anuj Goyal vs Manohar Lal Vij Resolution ...

IN THE MATTER OF: Anuj Goyal ...Appellant Vs. Manohar Lal Vij ...Respondent

Present: For Appellant: Mr. Sanjeev Dubey, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Milan Singh Negi, Mr. Deepak Vohra, Advocates

For Respondent: Mr. Abhishek Anand, RP

ORDER

(Through Virtual Mode)

13.01.2022 : Heard Learned Sr. Counsel, Mr. Sanjeev Dubey

appearing for the Appellant and Learned Counsel Mr. Abhishek

Anand appearing for the Respondent.

2. This appeal has been filed against the judgement and order

dated 22.11.2021 by which IA No. 4878/2021 filed by the

Appellant has been rejected.

3. Brief facts to be noted for deciding this appeal are, the CIRP

proceedings against the Corporate Debtor were initiated on

12.03.2021. Form G i.e. invitation for 'Expression of Interest'(EOI) Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.1077 of 2021 1 was published on 26.05.2021 in response to which the Appellant

filed his 'Expression of Interest' along with necessary declaration

as required by Section 29A of the Code as well as 'minimum net

worth certificate' which was the condition of eligibility.

4. The 'Resolution Professional' (RP) after considering all

'Expression of Interest' issued a list of prospective Resolution

Applicants in which the name of the Applicant, the Appellant was

included in the category of individuals. The CoC took a decision

to issue another 'Expression of Interest' which was issued on

25.08.2021. The 'Expression of Interest' which was issued

contained the same eligibility for prospective Resolution Applicant

and the 'Expression of Interest' also noted the following in

paragraph 5:-

"Prospective Resolution

Applicants (PRAs) who

submitted their Expression of

Interest (EOI) pursuant to

publication of Form G on 26th

May, 2021 and whose names

were appearing in the final list

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.1077 of 2021 2 of PRAs dated 1st July, 2021,

published by the RP, will be

considered as deemed PRAs

in the CIRP subject to

submission of refundable

deposit of Rs. 1,00,000/-

along with the conformity

letter. Accordingly, no

detailed fresh EOI need to be

submitted by them."

5. The Appellant deposited the amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- along

with the confirmity letter as required. Certain emails were

exchanged by the team of the 'Resolution Professional' (RP) asking

the Appellant regarding 'net worth certificate' as well as regarding

details of connected entities. The said emails were replied by the

Appellant and again on 15.09.2021 also, copy of minimum 'net

worth certificate' and name of the Bank Account was

communicated. List of relatives of the Appellant was also

submitted to the 'Resolution Professional' (RP) by the Appellant by

email dated 22.09.2021.

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.1077 of 2021 3

6. It appears that the Resolution Applicant issued a list of

prospective Resolution Applicant September 20th, 2021 in which

the name of the Appellant was deleted. The Appellant was

communicated by email on 20th September that his 'net worth

certificate' was not properly supported her net worth and his

eligibility regarding net worth could not be established. The details

of connected entities and the details of related parties were not

there. The Appellant filed an IA before the Adjudicating Authority

seeking a direction to include the Appellant in the list of

prospective Resolution Applicant.

7. During the pendency of the application, the Appellant also

filed his Resolution Plan dated 23.10.2021. The Adjudicating

Authority by the order dated 22.11.2021 noticing the submission

of RP held that there is no illegality in the action of 'Resolution

Professional' (RP). The said order is under challenge.

8. Learned Counsel for the Appellant, Mr. Dubey submits that

both the conditions which are stated to be wanting has been

fulfilled the 'net worth certificate' was filed by the Chartered

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.1077 of 2021 4 Accountant where the net worth of the Appellant was certified as

10,84,27,928/- and liability were shown to be nil.

9. In so far as the compliance of Section 29A, it is submitted

that requisite affidavit was filed and after considering the relevant

materials as was earlier submitted in first 'Expression of Interest'

on 26.05.2021, the Appellant was declared as Successful

Resolution Applicant and there was no change of eligibility in

second 'Expression of Interest' which the applicant provided, there

was no occasion to delete the name of the Applicant.

10. We have above noticed one of the statement in the 2nd

'Expression of Interest' dated 25.08.2021, which provided that

those prospective Resolution Applicant who had submitted the

'Expression of Interest' pursuant to application dated 25.05.2021

and whose names were appearing in the final list shall be

considered as deemed PRA subject to submission of refundable of

Rs. one lakh. The Appellant deposited Rs. one lakh for which there

is no dispute.

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.1077 of 2021 5

11. In view of the above clause and the subsequent 'Expression

of Interest' on 25.08.2021, the Appellant was clearly entitled and

eligible for, to be included in the list of prospective Resolution

Applicant.

12. We have looked into the 'net worth certificate' submitted by

the Appellant, we do not find that the 'net worth certificate' did

not fulfil the eligibility as required of two crores' net worth for the

Applicant to submit a Resolution Plan.

13. In so far as the submissions regarding the compliance of

Section 29A, an affidavit was filed and on the basis of materials

shown by the Appellant, he was declared to be eligible. On the

same documents there was no valid reason for deleting his name

from the list of prospective Resolution Applicant.

14. The object of IBC proceedings is to maximise the Assets of

'Corporate Debtor'. The Resolution Professional should welcome

the 'Expression of Interest' and unless prima facie, the Resolution

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.1077 of 2021 6 Applicant does not appear to be eligible, the Resolution Applicant

should permit submission of 'Expression of Interest'.

15. Present is a case where we see that there was no valid reason

for the Appellant's name be deleted from the list of prospective

Resolution Applicant. The Adjudicating Authority has also without

considering any of the materials on record and submission, only

relying on the statement of RP has rejected the application. The

impugned order dated 22.11.2021 is set aside. The Applicant is

declared to be included in the final list of prospective Resolution

Applicants. As submitted by Learned Counsel for RP, his plan

already submitted on 23.10.2021 shall also be placed before the

CoC. The appeal is allowed accordingly.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra] Member (Technical)

ss/nn

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.1077 of 2021 7