Uco Bank vs Ramanahalli S Doddabyregowda & Anr

UCO Bank ...Appellant

Versus

Ramanahalli Doddabyregowda & Anr. ...Respondents

Present: For Appellant : Mr. Partha Sil and Mr. Tavish B. Prasad, Advocates

ORDER

19.03.2020 After hearing the learned counsel for the Appellant (UCO

Bank) we find that the 'corporate insolvency resolution process' has been

initiated at the instance of an 'Operational Creditor' under Section 9 of the 'I&B

Code' and the Appellant (UCO Bank) being the sole 'financial creditor' has not

been included in the 'Committee of Creditors' in view of the affidavit emanating

from the Appellant dated 31st January, 2020 saying that "it is not interested in

pursuing the corporate insolvency resolution process".

Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the affidavit was filed

under a misconception as in the opinion of the Appellant (Financial Creditor) the

Corporate Debtor was not possessed of adequate assets to satisfy the claim and

the Appellant considered it as a fit case for the 'Corporate Debtor' to be sent for

Liquidation.

-2-

Having considered the arguments advanced on behalf of the learned

counsel for the Appellant and keeping in view of the mandate of Section 21 of

the I&B Code, we allow the Appellant to withdraw the appeal with liberty to raise

the issue of reconstitution of the 'Committee of Creditors' in the light of the

provisions of Section 21 of the 'I&B Code' before the learned Adjudicating

Authority.

The appeal is accordingly disposed of as withdrawn with the aforesaid

liberty.

[ Justice Bansi Lal Bhat ] Acting Chairperson

[ Shreesha Merla ] Member (Technical)

/ns/rr/

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 433 of 2020