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>Insolvency Cases Emphasize Procedural Compliance and Timely Filings</h1> <h3>Hajura Singh Bhim Singh Versus Best Foods Limited</h3> The judgments in the cases addressed various procedural aspects, compliance requirements, and the importance of adhering to timelines in insolvency ... Additional time period of 75 days sought for completion of the CIRP - permission to CoC members, who abstained from voting to submit their vote on approval of the resolution plan or liquidation of the corporate debtor - HELD THAT:- The Code has provided certain timelines for completion of the CIRP with a specific object and purpose. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of COMMITTEE OF CREDITORS OF ESSAR STEEL INDIA LIMITED THROUGH AUTHORISED SIGNATORY VERSUS SATISH KUMAR GUPTA & OTHERS [2019 (11) TMI 731 - SUPREME COURT] held that 330 days is not mandatory and in exceptional cases, and where the circumstances warrant, the same can be extended for a further reasonable period. But in the instant case, one of the CoC member, i.e. SBI when this Adjudicating Authority specifically provided opportunity to consider the resolution plan of Maritime Trade Corporation by extending time and by issuing certain specific directions, having failed to act and having allowed to lapse the maximum period provided under the Code, now through the resolution professional seeking extension of further time and also for issuance of further directions for convening of the meeting of the CoC for consideration of the resolution for approval of the resolution plan of the Maritime Trade Corporation. Let the resolution professional take out the notice to State Bank of India and serve the same and file affidavit of service accordingly. State Bank of India shall file an affidavit explaining the day-to-day delay from 15.11.2019 on which date, the last CoC meeting was held under the orders of this Adjudicating Authority, to till date and also to explain why exemplary costs are not imposed on it for its aforesaid conduct. List the instant CA on 06.03.2020. Issues:1. Additional affidavit filed by the applicant in CA No.375/2018.2. Filing of replies by respondents in CA No.572/2018.3. Condonation of delay in compliance with the order dated 31.10.2019 in CA No.1078/2019.4. Disposal of CA No.1078/2019 due to failure to file an application under Section 31 or 33 of the Code.5. Dispute regarding approval of resolution plan and liquidation in CA No.1077/2019.6. Request for extension of time period and convening of CoC meeting in CA No.1077/2019.Analysis:1. In CA No.375/2018, an additional affidavit was filed by the applicant, which was taken on record. The matter was heard, and orders were reserved.2. CA No.572/2018 involved the filing of replies by respondents, except respondent No.2, which was to be filed by a specified date. The respondents' personal presence was exempted, and a timeline was set for filing rejoinders.3. CA No.1078/2019 dealt with seeking condonation of a delay in compliance with an order dated 31.10.2019. The resolution professional failed to file the required application under Section 31 or 33 of the Code, leading to the dismissal of the case.4. The judgment in CA No.1077/2019 highlighted a dispute over the approval of a resolution plan and liquidation. The CoC rejected the resolution plan, and subsequent actions and communications were detailed, leading to the filing of a request for an extension of time and convening of a CoC meeting.5. The resolution professional in CA No.1077/2019 sought additional time for completing the CIRP and allowing CoC members who abstained from voting to submit their votes. The CoC meetings and voting outcomes were discussed, particularly focusing on State Bank of India's role and subsequent actions.6. The judgment emphasized the importance of timelines in the CIRP process, citing relevant legal precedents. The conduct of State Bank of India was scrutinized, and directions were issued for further actions, including serving notices and explanations for delays.Overall, the judgments addressed various procedural aspects, compliance requirements, voting outcomes, and the significance of adhering to timelines in insolvency resolution processes. The decisions reflected a meticulous examination of the facts and legal provisions to ensure fair and efficient resolution proceedings.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
