Ca Ashish Saoji Resolution ... vs Respondent
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 19 of 2025
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The period during which the Interim Resolution Professional was unable to discharge his functions on account of ill health, and during which the CIRP could not proceed, is to be excluded from computation of the CIRP period, where the incapacity of the IRP is shown on the record by his resignation and the Adjudicating Authority's own recognition of it.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: CA Ashish Saoji, RP Interdril Asia Ltd. ...Appellant Versus --- ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Jatin Kumar, Advocate.
For Respondent :
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
07.01.2025 : Heard Counsel for the Appellant.
2. This Appeal has been filed against an Order dated 27.11.2024 by which
I.A. No. 1934/PB/2019 seeking exclusion of 588 days from computation of
CIRP period has been partly allowed by granting exclusion of 540 days, during
which period Interim Order was granted by the NCLAT was operated i.e., from
18.01.2023 to 11.07.2024, however, the period from 11.07.2024 to
28.08.2024 which was also prayed to be excluded has been refused.
3. Counsel for the Appellant submits that the earlier IRP who was
appointed could not function due to his ill health and ultimately has
submitted his resignation on 14.08.2024, which clearly mentions that he has
been writing since May 2024 regarding inability of the IRP to continue his
appointment and after his resignation, new IRP was appointed by the
Adjudicating Authority on 28.08.2024, hence from 11.07.2024 till 28.08.2024 earlier IRP could not function nor discharge any function, hence the said
period also required to be excluded. Counsel for the Appellant further
submitted that in the Order dated 28.08.2024 the fact of resignation on health
issues has been noticed.
4. We have considered the submissions of Counsel for the Appellant and
perused the record.
5. The Application was filed with the resolution of the CoC seeking
exclusion for the entire period i.e., from 18.01.2023 till 28.08.2024. The
resignation of the IRP has been brought on the record as Annexure 6. In Para
2 of the said Application following has been stated by the IRP:
"...This letter is in continuation to the emails exchanged with your office since May 2024 informing you of the inability of the Interim Resolution Professional to continue his appointment in the captioned matter owing to his deteriorating health. The undersigned humbly requests you to accept his resignation as the Interim Resolution Professional of Mis Interdril Asia Limited..."
6. Adjudicating Authority also in its Order dated 28.08.2024 has noticed
the resignation of the IRP and on account of the health issues and in the
Order dated 28.08.2024 following has been observed by the Adjudicating
Authority:
"Ld. Counsel submitted that the IRP who was appointed by this Adjudicating Authority has tendered his resignation vide communication dated 14.08.2024. In view of the health issues of the IRP, since CoC has not been constituted so far the Financial Creditor who had initiated the CIRP i.e. the present Applicant has accepted the resignation of the IRP and has now proposed the name of, Mr. Ashish Avinash Saoji having registration no. IBBI/IPA-001/IP-P01268/2018-
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 19 of 2025 2 of 3 2019/12150. The written consent of the said IRP as well as valid AFA has also been filed. Keeping in view, the fact that the Constitution of the CoC was stayed by the Hon'ble NCLAT and CoC was not constituted by the IRP and in view the fact that IRP due to in different health is unable to do any function as IRP, we allow this application so far it relates to replacement of the IRP as the earlier IRP was also appointed on the basis of name suggested by the Financial Creditor. The IRP earlier appointed is discharged and he is directed to hand over all the documents and material available with him to the newly appointed IRP."
7. We thus are of the view that the period after 11.07.2024 till 28.08.2024
also required to be excluded since CIRP could not proceed any further on
account of ill health of IRP and he started writing from May 2024 to the
Financial Creditor he is unable to discharge his function.
8. We find substance in the submission of the Appellant. The Appellant
was entitled to exclusion of the entire period of 588 days which was claimed
in the Application, hence the period from 18.01.2023 to 28.08.2024 stands
excluded. Subsequent extension of 90 days which has been allowed on
09.12.2024 shall be computed thereafter.
Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) himanshu/nn
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 19 of 2025 3 of 3
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free