Prem Baldwa vs Kuldeep Kumar Gupta
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1397 of 2025
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The appellate authority dismissed the appeal without deciding the merits of the appointment dispute; its reasoning rests only on the procedural point that a challenge to the adjudicating authority's replacement of a resolution professional may be made by the debtor or creditor through an application under Section 98 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and that the appellate forum therefore need not keep the appeal pending.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Prem Baldwa ...Appellant Versus Kuldeep Kumar Gupta ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant : Ms. Anurag Kalavatia, Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr. Prateek Kaidwat, Advocate.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
10.09.2025 : This appeal has been filed against an order passed by the
adjudicating authority dated 12.08.2025 in Section 94 application.
2. The grievance of the appellant is that RP who was recommended by the
debtor has not been appointed and another RP has been appointed on the
ground that authorisation of the RP proposed by the debtor is valid only upto
30.06.2025. It is submitted by the appellant that AFA of the RP proposed has
already been extended till June 2026 hence adjudicating authority ought to
have accepted the RP.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the RP appointed by the impugned order
submits that they have already taken charge and scrutinizing the documents.
4. Under Section 98 of the IBC, debtor or creditor is entitled to apply to
the adjudicating authority for replacement of the RP.
5. It is open for the appellant to make an appropriate application under
Section 98 for replacement of the RP appointed by the adjudicating authority
by the impugned order and it is for the adjudicating authority to take a call
and take a decision with regard to prayer made by the debtor.
In view of the aforesaid, we see no reason to keep the appeal pending.
The appeal is dismissed with the liberty aforesaid.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) himanshu/nn
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1397 of 2025 2 of 2
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