Narinder Bhushan Aggarwal vs Little Bee International Pvt Ltd & Anr

Narinder Bhushan Aggarwal ....Appellant Vs. M/s. Little Bee International Pvt. Ltd & Anr. ....Respondents

Present:

Appellant: Mr. Ajay Gaggar, Mr. D. Adhikari and Mr. Vineeta Rathore, Advocates.

ORDER

(Through Virtual Mode) 18.11.2020: Appellant- Mr. Narinder Bhushan Aggarwal is the liquidator

in 'M/s. Little Bee International Private Limited'. He is aggrieved of the impugned

order dated 26th February, 2019 only to the extent of remuneration of Liquidator

which in terms of the impugned order is directed to be payable as per Regulation

4(2) and (3) of the Liquidation Process Regulations, 2016 and not under

Regulation 39D.

2. After hearing learned counsel for the Appellant, we find that the Corporate

Debtor has been sent into liquidation and the Committee of Creditors has in its

8th meeting held on 25th November, 2019, with a voting share of 69.48% approved

the contribution of estimated expenses of the liquidation by the Financial

Creditors in an escrow account in the ratio of their claims. The Committee of

Creditors vide the same resolution and the same voting shares approved the

Contd/-.............

-2-

remuneration of the Appellant for the conduct of liquidation proceedings at

Rs.50,000/- per month or such proportion to the value of the liquidation estate

assets as specified by the Board as per Regulation 4(2) of the Liquidation Process

Regulations, 2016.

3. The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Chandigarh

Bench, Chandigarh was of the view that Regulation 39D provides for fixation of

the fees separately by the Committee of Creditors for the three periods given in

Section 39D and the fees in the instant case was not governed by Section 39D

as the order of liquidation came to be passed under Section 33(1) (a) of the 'I&B

Code'. Be that as it may, the order of liquidation has been passed and the

Corporate Debtor is undergoing liquidation process. It is immaterial which

provision of the 'I&B Code' squarely governs the passage of order of liquidation.

The fact remains that the Committee of Creditors has taken a decision in regard

to the liquidation costs, expenses and the remuneration payable to the liquidator

which in the light of the recommendation of the Committee of Creditors with the

requisite percentage brings it within the ambit of Regulation 39D. Therefore, it

is not permissible to take resort to any other provision which would be attracted

only if the action of the Committee of Creditors would fall beyond the purview of

Regulation 39D. The remuneration of liquidator falling within the realm of the

Committee of Creditors in terms of Regulation 39D, we find that the impugned

order cannot be sustained. The impugned order is accordingly set aside to the

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 980 of 2020 -3-

limited extent of remuneration of the liquidator and it is directed that the

liquidator's remuneration will be governed in accordance with the

recommendation of the Committee of Creditors.

The appeal is accordingly disposed of.

[Justice Bansi Lal Bhat] Acting Chairperson

[Justice Anant Bijay Singh] Member (Judicial)

[Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra] Member (Technical)

AR/g

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 980 of 2020