Vivekanand Dhaneshwar Jha And Anr vs Jigar Tarun Bhatt Resolution ...

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1463 & 1464 of 2023 & I.A. No. 529, 5240 of 2023

IN THE MATTER OF:

Vivekanand Dhaneshwar Jha & Anr. ...Appellant

Versus

Jigar Tarun Bhatt & Anr. ...Respondents

Present: For Appellant: Mr. Sahil Chandra, Advocate For Respondent: With Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1465- 1466 of 2023 & I.A. No. 5250 of 2023

IN THE MATTER OF:

Vivekanand Dhaneshwar Jha & Anr. ...Appellant

Versus

Jigar Tarun Bhatt & Anr. ...Respondents

Present: For Appellant: Mr. Sahil Chandra, Advocate For Respondent:

ORDER

09.11.2023: Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant.

2. These two appeals have been filed against the Order dated 15.09.2023

by which order the Adjudicating Authority has allowed the Application I.A. No.

105/AHM/2022 praying for liquidation of the Corporate Debtor as well as

rejected the I.A. No. 25/AHM/2023 filed by the Appellant praying various

reliefs.

-2-

3. Brief facts of the case necessary to be noticed for deciding this Appeal

are. The CIRP against the Corporate Debtor was initiated by Order dated

15.04.2021. In the CIRP, no Resolution Plan can be received. The Appellant

who is suspended director of the Corporate Debtor challenged the Order of

Admission before this tribunal which appeal came to be dismissed. Aggrieved

by the order of this Tribunal, the Appellant challenged the order before the

Hon'ble Supreme Court which Civil Appeal was also dismissed by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court. The CoC passed a resolution on 06.01.2022 resolving to

liquidate the Corporate Debtor since no resolution plan has been received in

the CIRP. In pursuance of the decision of the CoC to liquidate the Corporate

Debtor, I.A. was filed by the RP being I.A. No. 105/AHM/2022. The Appellant

also filed I.A. No. 25/AHM/2023 where following prayers were made:

"A. This Hon'ble Adjudicating Authority may be pleased to set aside the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process of Mithilanchal Industries Private Ltd, made pursuant to the order dated 15.04.2021 in CP (IB) No. 173 of 2019 considering the peculiar facts and circumstances including in particular the fraudulent and malicious proceedings taken by respondent bank read with the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vidarbha Industries Power Limited vs. Axis Bank, reported at (2022) 8 SCC 352, in the interest of justice;

B. This Hon 'ble Adjudicating Authority may be impose such penalty as may be deemed appropriate by this Hon'ble Adjudicating Authority upon the respondent bank for initiating fraudulent and malicious proceedings against

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1463-1466/2023 -3-

Mithilanchal Industries Private Ltd, the Corporate Debtor, in the interest of justice.

C. This Hon'ble Adjudicating Authority may be pleased to pass any other and further orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice".

4. The adjudicating Authority by the Impugned Order has allowed the

Application of Resolution Professional directing for liquidation of the Corporate

Debtor and simultaneously rejected the I.A. No. 25/AHM/2023 filed by the

Appellant.

5. Learned Counsel for the Appellant challenging the order contends that

Resolution Professional has not conducted the CIRP in accordance with the

scheme of IBC and there were several allegations against the Resolution

Professional. It is further submitted that initiation of CIRP itself was bad.

6. We have considered the submissions of Learned Counsel for the

Appellant and perused the record.

7. When the Adjudicating Authority admitted Section 7 Application the

same was challenged by the Appellant before this Tribunal as well as before

the Hon'ble Supreme Court by Civil Appeal No. 4677 of 2021 which was

dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court on 16th August, 2021. We see no reason

to entertain any of the submissions of the Appellant questioning the CIRP and

the prayer in the Application I.A. No. 25/AHM/2023 to set aside the entire

CIRP was wholly misconceived. When no resolution plan has come up in the

CIRP, Liquidation is only option which was rightly resolved by the CoC in its

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1463-1466/2023 -4-

meeting as noticed above. The Adjudicating Authority did not commit any error

in allowing the Application of Resolution Professional for liquidation.

8. Learned Counsel for the Appellant further contended that Appellant is

also interesting in proposing a scheme in the liquidation. The suspended

management is fully entitled to submit a scheme provided it is eligible within

meaning of Section 29A as per Regulation 2B of the Liquidation Process,

Regulations, 2016.

9. Learned Counsel for the Appellant lastly submits that there is various

litigation on behalf of Companies as well as Suspended Director against the

Bank which ought to have been pursued by the Resolution Professional. We

are of the view that in so far as litigation by Suspended Director against the

Bank, there was no occasion to RP to pursue the same as far as any litigation

on behalf of the Company, leave of the Court was required for pursuing the

said application which admittedly has not been obtained. We see no substance

in the above submission of the Appellant.

10. With the above observations, we dismiss these Appeals.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Mr. Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)

Basant/nn

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1463-1466/2023