Kl Rathi Steels Limited vs Mr. Ajit Kumar

KL Rathi Steels Limited ...Appellant

Versus

Mr. Ajit Kumar Jha, ...Respondents Resolution Professional & Anr.

Present: For Appellant: Mr. Saurabh Kalia, Mr. Vibhn Jaiswal, Advocates For Respondent: Mr. Kunal Tandon, Ms. Richa Sandilya, Ms. Hita Sharma, Advocates for R-2 Mr. Abhishek Anant, Mr. Nitin Gautam, Advocates for R-1, RP

ORDER

02.08.2022: Heard Learned Counsel for the parties.

2. This Appeal has been filed against the Order dated 08th April, 2022

passed by the Adjudicating Authority by which the Adjudicating Authority has

rejected the Application CA-2855/2019 filed by the Appellant. The 'Corporate

Insolvency Resolution Process' (CIRP in short) with regard to the Corporate

Debtor was initiated on 16th April, 2019 as per From-G inviting Expression of

Interest (EOI in short) for Corporate Debtor was published and last date for

submission of receipt of EOI was on 21st August, 2019. The second time Form-

G was issued on 19th November, 2019 where 04th December, 2019 was fixed

last date for submission of receipt of EOI and the last date for submission of

Resolution Plan was 06.01.2020. Appellant came to know about the CIRP only

in December, 2019 and submitted an EOI on 14.12.2019 which was not

accepted by the Resolution Professional and by email dated 14th December, -2-

2019 Appellant was informed. An application being CA-2855/2019 was filed

by the Appellant seeking a direction to Respondent to permit the Appellant to

submit a Resolution Plan. Adjudicating Authority by the Impugned Order has

rejected the said Application. Aggrieved by the said Order, Appellant has come

up in this Appeal.

2. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that EOI was delayed only

for 10 days and the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process being current,

he could very well have been permitted to submit his EoI. He submits that the

Adjudicating Authority further observed that as per Regulation 36A(6) of

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for

Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016, the EOI of the Appellant not being in

accordance with the Regulation 36A is to be rejected.

3. Learned Counsel for the Respondent submits that Resolution Plan has

already been approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC in short) on 01st

February, 2020 and Application for approval of the Resolution Plan is pending

before the Adjudicating Authority.

4. We have considered the submissions of Learned Counsel for the parties

and perused the record.

5. From the facts which have been brought on record, it does appear that

Appellant's EOI was submitted delayed and submitted after 10 days after last

days were over. Resolution Professional Communication refusing the EOI can

not be faulted. The Adjudicating Authority has also by the Order rejected the

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 592/2022 -3-

Application filed by the Appellant. The Resolution Plan was approved in

February, 2020 more than two and half years have elapsed when the

Resolution Plan was approved. Period of CIRP having expired long ago and the

Application being pending for approval of the plan before the Adjudicating

Authority, at this stage, we are not inclined to issue any direction as prayed

by the Appellant in his Application. Issuing any direction at this stage shall be

putting the clock back the period of CIRP being long over, no such order be

passed.

6. Learned Counsel for the Appellant has relied on the Judgment of Hon'ble

Apex Court in the matter of Kalpraj Dharamshi & Anr. Vs. Kotak Investment

Advisors Ltd. (2021) 10 SCC 401. Learned Counsel submits that in the said

case, the Adjudicating Authority has accepted the EOI after the time was over

which was approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The fact that EOI was

accepted beyond the last date for, is always in the domain of CoC and in event

within the timeline of CoC the said delayed EOI accepted, no exception can be

taken. The Hon'ble Supreme Court relied by the Appellant is clearly

distinguishable and is not attracted in the facts of the present case. We thus

are of the view that no relief can be granted to the Appellant in the present

Appeal. The Appeal is dismissed.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Mr. Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) Basant/nn Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 592/2022