TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court emphasizes document provision in CIRP, directs Adjudicating Authority to decide</h1> <h3>Ravi Prakash Goyal Versus Punjab National Bank and others</h3> Ravi Prakash Goyal Versus Punjab National Bank and others - TMI Issues:1. Non-supply of relevant documents to the erstwhile Board of Directors during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).2. Allegation of the CIRP process being vitiated due to lack of access to essential documents.3. Petitioner's contention regarding the approval of a Revised Consolidation Resolution Plan without providing necessary documents.4. Concern over the general practice of not providing resolution plans and documents to Directors during the CIRP process.5. Application for quashing the CIRP process and restarting it.6. Reference to recent judgments by the Hon'ble Supreme Court emphasizing strict adherence to prescribed procedures in insolvency cases.7. Decision by the High Court regarding the issues raised by the petitioner.Analysis:1. The primary issue in this case revolves around the non-supply of crucial documents to the erstwhile Board of Directors during the CIRP of the Corporate Debtor. The petitioner alleged that the lack of access to documents such as resolution plans, fair value reports, and reports on section 29A hindered their effective participation in the CIRP process, thus vitiating the entire process.2. The petitioner heavily relied on the directions given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a previous judgment, emphasizing the importance of providing relevant documents to Directors and ensuring their participation in the Committee of Creditors (CoC) meetings. The petitioner contended that the failure to provide necessary documents impeded their ability to contribute meaningfully to the CIRP proceedings.3. Another significant aspect of the case was the approval of a Revised Consolidation Resolution Plan without providing the Board of Directors access to the plan during the CIRP process. The petitioner raised concerns about the fairness of the process, especially when essential documents were not made available for scrutiny and input.4. The petitioner highlighted a broader concern regarding the prevalent practice of withholding resolution plans and other essential documents from Directors during the CIRP of various companies. This practice was viewed as detrimental to the transparency and integrity of the insolvency resolution process.5. Seeking redress, the petitioner filed an application to quash the ongoing CIRP process and requested a fresh start, citing the lack of access to critical documents as a fundamental flaw in the proceedings.6. The petitioner also referenced recent judgments by the Hon'ble Supreme Court emphasizing strict adherence to legal procedures in insolvency cases, underscoring the importance of following the law diligently in such matters.7. In its decision, the High Court acknowledged the issues raised by the petitioner and issued specific directions. The Court treated the provision of necessary documents to the erstwhile Board of Directors as a preliminary issue to be decided by the Adjudicating Authority. The judgment emphasized adherence to the Supreme Court's directives and allowed affected parties to pursue appellate remedies within a specified timeframe. Other issues arising from the insolvency process were left open for determination by the appropriate legal authorities.By addressing the concerns raised by the petitioner and providing clear directives based on legal principles, the High Court ensured a fair and transparent resolution of the issues surrounding the CIRP process in this case.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
