Tribunal orders RP to justify claim rejections, dismisses belated Resolution Plan application. Consortium partner replacement request withdrawn.

The Tribunal directed the Resolution Professional (RP) to provide a reasoned order regarding the verification of outstanding claims, emphasizing the duty to specify reasons for claim rejections. A company's belated application for a new Resolution Plan after the approval of an existing plan was dismissed for not meeting eligibility criteria within the timeline. A subsequent application to replace a consortium partner was withdrawn following the dismissal of the prior application. The RP was directed to file a reply for a new application before the next hearing date.

---

---

Issues involved:
1. Direction against the RP for a reasoned order regarding verification of outstanding claims.
2. Application seeking direction for submission of a new Resolution Plan after the approval of an existing plan.
3. Application for replacement of a consortium partner for a Resolution Plan.
4. RP directed to file a reply for a new application.

Issue 1:
The Tribunal addressed an application by a company seeking a direction against the Resolution Professional (RP) to provide a reasoned order regarding the verification of outstanding claims. The company had claimed a certain amount, part of which was allowed by the RP without specifying reasons for rejecting the remaining portion. The Tribunal emphasized the RP's duty to provide reasons for claim rejections. As no proof was presented by the RP reflecting reasons for rejection, the Tribunal directed the RP to either admit the claim or provide reasons for rejecting the balance part within three days.

Issue 2:
In another application, a company sought to file a new Resolution Plan after the Committee of Creditors (CoC) had already approved a different plan. The company had failed to meet the eligibility criteria within the stipulated timeline for submitting an Expression of Interest. Despite the CoC's unanimous approval of the existing plan, the company requested an opportunity to submit a new plan, citing a consortium agreement with another company. The Tribunal noted that the company's belated application, after the expiry of the timeline, was against the spirit of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Emphasizing the importance of adhering to timelines, the Tribunal dismissed the application as misconceived.

Issue 3:
A subsequent application was filed by the same company to replace a consortium partner for the Resolution Plan. However, following the dismissal of the previous application, the company sought withdrawal of the new application for partner replacement. The Tribunal dismissed the application as withdrawn.

Issue 4:
Lastly, an application was made, and the RP accepted notice, with directions for the RP to file a reply before the next hearing date, scheduled for 05.03.2020.

This comprehensive analysis covers the Tribunal's rulings on various applications related to outstanding claims verification, submission of new Resolution Plans, consortium partner replacements, and the RP's obligation to respond to new applications.

---