State Bank Of India & Anr vs Venakataramanarao Nagarajan, ...
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 772 of 2018
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The appellate order rests on the following reasoning. Where the committee of creditors has approved no resolution plan and the corporate insolvency resolution period of 270 days has lapsed, the resolution professional's application for liquidation, once accepted and an order of liquidation passed, cannot be impugned merely because the committee of creditors sought the removal of that resolution professional, since the committee of creditors has by then ceased to exist and become functus officio. The removal of a resolution professional, even if the impugned order were set aside, does not render an order of liquidation passed after the expiry of the 270-day period illegal, so no relief can be granted against such an order in appeal.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
ICICI Bank Ltd. ...Appellant
Versus
Mr. Venakataramanarao Nagarajan, Resolution Professional ...Respondent
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 774 of 2018
IN THE MATTER OF:
State Bank of India & anr. ...Appellants
Versus
Mr. Venakataramanarao Nagarajan, Resolution Professional ...Respondent
Present:
For Appellant (s) : Mr. Om Prakash, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. M. Anbalagan and Ms. Madhusmita Bora, Advocates
ORDER
13.12.2018 These appeals have been preferred by 'ICICI Bank' and 'State
Bank of India' (Financial Creditors) against the order dated 31st October 2018 2
passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Single
Bench, Chennai whereby the application filed by the appellant(s) on behalf of
'committee of creditors' to remove Mr. V. Nagarajan, 'Resolution Professional' has
been rejected and order of liquidation has been passed u/s 33(1)(a)/34(1) of the
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ('I&B Code' for short)
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant(s) submitted that
'committee of creditors' by 100% majority votes decided to remove Mr. Mr. V.
Nagarajan, 'Resolution Professional' but in spite of the same miscellaneous
application preferred by the 'committee of creditors' have been rejected and the
application preferred by Mr. V. Nagarajan, Resolution Professional for liquidation
has been approved.
From the record we have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and
perused the record.
We find that no 'resolution plan' was approved by the 'committee of
creditors' and in the meantime 270 days having lapsed on 5th of September, 2018,
the 'Resolution Professional' filed a miscellaneous application for liquidation,
which is accepted and order of liquidation has been passed. On such order, as
the 'committee of creditors' ceased to exist and become functus officio even if we
set aside the impugned order dated 31st October, 2018 and remove Mr. V.
Nagarajan, the order of liquidation cannot be declare illegal as more than 270
days having passed. For the reason aforesaid no relief can be granted. The
appeal is dismissed. No cost.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) Nos. 772 & 774 of 2018 3
However, this order passed by the Appellate Tribunal does not mean that
we have given a finding relating to performance or activity of Mr. V. Nagarajan,
Resolution Professional/liquidator in which is for the IBBI to decide pursuant to
complaints made against him, uninfluenced by this order.
[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson
[ JusticeBansi Lal Bhat ] Member(Judicial) /ns/uk/
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) Nos. 772 & 774 of 2018
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