In the matter of Anupam Electricals and Engineering Industries Private Limited
- CitationIA(I.B.C)-5526(MB)2024 in C.P. (IB)-1126(MB)2019
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Adjudicating Authority will not ordinarily be drawn into disputes over the payment of professional fees of the Resolution Professional where the Committee of Creditors has ratified those fees by resolution, and a claim of fee that is not shown to be exorbitant does not warrant such intervention. Where a settlement is proposed under Section 12A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, the Adjudicating Authority may direct the Committee of Creditors or the Director of the Suspended Board to settle or deposit the CIRP cost, including the Resolution Professional's fee, as a precondition to the filing of Form FA for withdrawal, and may direct the Resolution Professional to submit Form FA in accordance with Regulation 30A of the CIRP Regulations.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH COURT VI Item No. 1 IA(I.B.C)/ 5526(MB)2024 in C.P. (IB)/1126(MB)2019 CORAM: SHRI SANJIV DUTT SHRI K. R. SAJI KUMAR HON’BLE MEMBER (TECHNICAL) HON’BLE MEMBER (JUDICIAL) ORDER SHEET OF HEARING (HYBRID) DATED 27.11.2024 NAME OF THE PARTIES: CG Power and Industrial Solutions Limited Vs Anupam Electricals and Engineering Industries Private Limited For Applicant: Adv. Mily Ghoshal a/w Adv. Shweta Thanekar For RP: Anish Gupta For Director of Suspended Board: CS Vijaykumar Tiwari Section 9 of IBC ORDER 1. This IA (I.B.C)/ 5526(MB)2024 is filed by the RP seeking direction against the sole member of CoC of CG Power and Industrial Solutions & Mr. Ramavatar S Modani, Director of the Suspended Board, for settling CIRP cost (including fee payable to the RP, being part of CIRP cost) as the matter is proposed to be settled. It is alleged that the CoC is not ready to pay the fee to the RP, after having resolved by 100% voting to pay the same in the 2nd meeting of the CoC held on 29.07.2024, contending that the RP is not entitled to the same. We have made it abundantly clear in the previous listings also that the AA should not be unnecessarily drawn into the disputes as to payment of professional fees, especially after ratifying the same by the CoC. Moreover, the fee claimed by the RP does not appear to us to be exorbitant. 2. However, today, the Authorised Representative appearing for the Director of Suspended Board requests for time for getting instructions as to the payment of Rs. 6,40,000/- (Six lakh forty thousand), as part of CIRP Cost, including fee for the RP. However, Counsel for RP submits that the Director of the Suspended Board should be directed to deposit the amount in a weeks’ time. 3. Having heard both the Counsel for RP and the Authorised Representative for the Director of the Suspended Board, we direct the CoC/Director of the Suspended Board to settle/deposit the CIRP cost in a weeks’ time, for the purposes of filing Form FA before us for withdrawal, if the matter is intended to be settled under Section 12A of the IBC. The RP is also directed to submit Form FA in accordance with Regulation 30A of the CIRP Regulations. 4. List for filing Form-FA in proper form and reporting payment/settlement. List on 04.12.2024 for further consideration. 5. Registry is directed to forward copy of this order to the IBBI for record.
Sd/- Sd/- SANJIV DUTT K. R. SAJI KUMAR HON’BLE MEMBER (TECHNICAL) HON’BLE MEMBER (JUDICIAL) (AJ)
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