2020 (10) TMI 218 - Tri - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Tribunal Grants Liquidation, Appoints Liquidator under Insolvency Code

Brij Mohan Sahni Versus Pawan Buildwell Pvt. Ltd.

The Tribunal allowed the application for liquidation of the Corporate Debtor, appointing a Liquidator to oversee the process in accordance with the ... Liquidation of Corporate Debtor - Section 33(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - appointment of Liquidator - HELD THAT:- The Resolution was passed with 100% in terms of voting power of CoC. The same is recorded in the Minutes of the 7th Meeting of COC, which are placed on record - Ld. RP, Sh. Arun Chadha has given his written consent to act as a Liquidator of the Corporate Debtor which forms part of the Application. Thus, there being no other alternative, the Ld. RP vide his application has prayed for allowing liquidation of the Corporate Debtor under Section 33 of the Code - Liquidation of the Corporate Debtor namely, M/s. Pawan Buildwell Private Limited is ordered in the manner as laid down in Chapter III of Part II of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - application allowed. Issues:1. Application for initiation of liquidation process under Sections 33(1)(a) and 33(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.2. Challenge to the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) and subsequent legal proceedings.3. Constitution and decisions of the Committee of Creditors (CoC).4. Rejection of claims and Resolution Plan.5. Proposal for liquidation of the Corporate Debtor and appointment of Liquidator.Analysis:1. The application was filed by the Resolution Professional seeking to initiate the liquidation process of the Corporate Debtor under Sections 33(1)(a) and 33(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Resolution Professional also requested to be appointed as the Liquidator of the Corporate Debtor.2. The case involved a challenge to the initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) by the Financial Creditor, which led to legal proceedings. The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) and the Supreme Court were involved in setting aside earlier orders and restoring the CIR Process, ultimately extending the period of CIR.3. The Interim Resolution Professional constituted a Committee of Creditors (CoC) consisting of only one Financial Creditor, Sh. Brij Mohan Sahni. The CoC made critical decisions regarding the rejection of claims and Resolution Plans, leading to the proposal for the liquidation of the Corporate Debtor.4. Only two claims were received, one from the Financial Creditor and another from M/s. Bajaj Finance Limited. The claim of M/s. Bajaj Finance Limited was rejected by the Resolution Professional, resulting in a legal challenge that was heard and decided by the Bench.5. Following discussions and resolutions by the CoC, the Liquidation of the Corporate Debtor was ordered, appointing Mr. Arun Chadha as the Liquidator. Specific directions were provided regarding the cessation of the Moratorium, discharge of officers and employees, investigation of financial affairs, submission of reports, and communication of the Order to relevant parties and authorities.In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the application for liquidation of the Corporate Debtor, providing detailed directions and appointing a Liquidator to oversee the process in accordance with the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 regulations. The judgment addressed various legal issues, decisions by the CoC, rejection of claims, and the resolution of the case through the liquidation process.