M/S. Gp Global Energy Pvt Ltd vs Anil Kohli & Anr

IN THE MATTER OF: Jag Mohan Garg ...Appellant Versus Rahul Jindal, RP for Tirupati Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent

Present: For Appellant : Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, Mr. Prakhar Mithal and Mr. Paras Mithal, Advocates.

For Respondent : Mr. Abhijeet Sinha, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Karan Gandhi, Mr. Sikhar Tiwari and Ms. Vidhika Kapoor, Advocates for RP.

Mr. Krishnendu Dutta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Harsh Gurbani, Advocates for CoC.

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

03.07.2025: Heard counsel for the appellant.

2. This contempt case has been filed praying for initiation of contempt

proceedings against the respondents for non-compliance of the order dated

15.12.2022 passed in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 14/2022.

3. The above appeal was filed by the GP Global Energy Private Limited the

earlier Resolution Applicant challenging the order passed by the adjudicating

authority dated 01.11.2021 by which approval granted to the Successful

Resolution Applicant (SRA) was cancelled and the amount deposited has been forfeited. The appeal was decided by this Tribunal by order dated 15.12.2022

and in the operative portion of paragraph 51 following was directed:

"51. In view of the fore-going discussions, Company Appeal (AT) Ins. No. 14 of 2022 is disposed of in following manner:

i. The Order dated 01.11.2021 passed in C.A. No. 1090(PB)/2020 in so far as it canceled the approval given to the Resolution Plan by Order dated

04.01.2022 as well as forfeiting Rs. 20 Crores deposited by the Resolution Applicant is affirmed. ii. The Order dated 01st November, 2021 in so far as direction No. III is concerned, is set aside. iii. National Company Law Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi is requested to dispose of C.A. No. 01 of 2018 within a period of three months from the date when copy of this Judgement is produced for the reasons as noted above.

iv. The Resolution Professional after decision of C.A. No. 01 of 2018 may invite fresh 'Expression of Interest' and complete the process within two months thereafter. The period of CIRP shall be treated to have been extended till then.

v. Company Appeal (AT) Ins. No. 15 of 2022 is dismissed. No order as to costs."

4. This appeal has been filed by the appellant, promoter of the corporate

debtor and learned counsel for the appellant refers to paragraph 51(iv) which

is as follows:

"51. In view of the fore-going discussions, Company Appeal (AT) Ins. No. 14 of 2022 is disposed of in following manner:

iv. The Resolution Professional after decision of C.A. No. 01 of 2018 may invite fresh 'Expression of Interest' and complete the process within two months thereafter. The period of CIRP shall be treated to have been extended till then.

5. The grievance of the appellant is that this Tribunal directed for decision

of CA No. 1/2018 which related to 5th floor of the hotel of the corporate debtor Contempt Case (AT) No. 19 of 2025 in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 14 of 2022 2 of 5 and the said application has not been decided as on date and the RP and CoC

has proceeded with the CIRP by inviting a fresh Expression of Interest (EoI)

and have violated the order.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further referred to order of this

Tribunal dated 09.02.2024 in I.A. No. 541/2024 and order dated 25.07.2024

passed in I.A. 5158/2024. It is useful to notice order dated 25.07.2024 which

was filed by the CoC of the corporate debtor where this Tribunal passed

following order:

"1. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that I.A. No. 1219/2024 has been filed by the Resolution Professional (RP) where following prayers have been made:

"1) Allow this present application.

2) Pass an order allow the Applicant/Resolution Professional to re-run the process to re-publish Invitation for Expression of Interest (FORM G) in the matter of CIRP of the Corporate Debtor as resolved by the Committee of Creditors in its 23rd Meeting with 100 % of majority.

3) Pass an order the extend the CIRP period for 90 days from the date of passing the order in the instant application.

4) Allow the Applicant to appoint the registered valuers for yet again undertaking the fresh valuation (recent) of the assets of the Corporate Debtor in terms of Regulation 27 r/w Regulation 35 of IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) regulations, 2016 as on the date of passing the order in the instant application;

5) Pass such further orders as this Hon'ble Adjudicating Authority may deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice in light of the circumstances and facts."

2. It is submitted that Prayer 2 & 4 are still pending for consideration. It is submitted that despite several Contempt Case (AT) No. 19 of 2025 in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 14 of 2022 3 of 5 orders CA No. 01/2018 numbered as I.A. No. 6139/2023 has not yet been disposed of which is now fixed by Impugned Order on 31.07.2024.

3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that Committee of Creditor (CoC) as well as the RP are ready to incorporate all details of litigation including the pendency of I.A. No. 6139/2023 which relates to dispute regarding the 5th Floor of the Hotel while inviting the fresh Form-G. It is submitted that however, in view of the Application 1219/2024 being pending, the RP is unable to issue any Form-G.

4. In facts of the present case, we are of the view that interest of justice being served disposing the Appeal requesting the Adjudicating Authority to pass orders on the I.A. 1219/2024 on the date fixed or as early as possible.

With these observations, we dispose of the Appeal. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that in view of the clarification issued by this Tribunal on 09.02.2024 the pendency of CA 01/2018 is not an impediment in issuance of fresh Form-G."

7. It was noticed in the order dated 25.07.2024 that I.A. No. 1219/2024

has been filed whose prayers were noticed in the order dated 25.07.2024 and

by the order dated 25.07.2024 adjudicating authority was requested to pass

order on I.A. No. 1219/2024. It is on the record that the I.A. No. 1219/2024

has been subsequently allowed by the adjudicating authority vide order dated

14.11.2024 and 03.12.2024. The fresh EoI thus has been issued by the

Resolution Professional (RP) and Committee of Creditors (CoC) in pursuance

of the subsequent order passed by the adjudicating authority. We thus are

not satisfied with the submission of the appellant that issuance of fresh EoI

is in violation of our order dated 15.12.2022, in application filed in the same

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1420/2024 when this Tribunal passed an

order on 25.07.2024 requesting the adjudicating authority to decide I.A. No.

Contempt Case (AT) No. 19 of 2025 in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 14 of 2022 4 of 5 1219/2024 and I.A. No. 1219/2024 having been decided permitting CIRP

issuance of fresh EoI.

8. We are of the view that no wilful contempt has been made out to initiate

any proceeding against the respondent.

Contempt Petition is closed.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Justice N. Seshasayee] Member (Judicial)

[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) himanshu/nn

Contempt Case (AT) No. 19 of 2025 in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 14 of 2022 5 of 5