Tribunal confirms Binani as Resolution Professional, dismisses objections.

The Tribunal upheld the Committee of Creditors' decision to appoint Mr. Sumit Binani as the Resolution Professional, finding it valid under Section 22 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The application to continue Mr. Mahender Kumar Khandelwal as Interim Resolution Professional was rejected, and Mr. Binani's appointment was directed for confirmation by the IBBI. The Court dismissed technical objections regarding the application's validity and confirmed compliance with the IBC. Further proceedings were scheduled for 16.06.2020.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Urgency and adjournment due to COVID-19.
2. Appointment of Mr. Sumit Binani as Resolution Professional (RP).
3. Continuation of Mr. Mahender Kumar Khandelwal as Interim Resolution Professional (IRP).
4. Validity of application filed by Power Finance Corporation (PFC) on behalf of Committee of Creditors (CoC).
5. Compliance with Section 22 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Urgency and Adjournment Due to COVID-19:
The applications IA No. 234/2020 and IA No. 235/2020 were initially scheduled for hearing on 08.04.2020 but were adjourned due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The urgency application IA No. 300/2020 was filed to expedite the hearing, leading to a directive for a hearing on 08.05.2020.

2. Appointment of Mr. Sumit Binani as Resolution Professional (RP):
The application IA No. 234/2020 was filed by Power Finance Corporation (PFC) on behalf of the CoC to appoint Mr. Sumit Binani as the RP. The CoC, with 89.6% voting in favor, resolved to appoint Mr. Binani, citing his qualifications and written consent. The Tribunal noted that the CoC's decision is not required to be justified with reasons and is within their prerogative as per Section 22 of the IBC.

3. Continuation of Mr. Mahender Kumar Khandelwal as Interim Resolution Professional (IRP):
Mr. Mahender Kumar Khandelwal, the current IRP, filed IA No. 235/2020 seeking to continue as RP, arguing that his previous conduct in CIRPs was fair and transparent. He contended that the CoC's decision was based on an IBBI order that was stayed by the Delhi High Court. However, the Tribunal observed that the CoC is not obligated to record reasons for replacing the IRP and that their decision is final unless it is perverse or without jurisdiction.

4. Validity of Application Filed by Power Finance Corporation (PFC) on Behalf of CoC:
The IRP challenged the validity of IA No. 234/2020, arguing it was not authorized by the CoC. The Tribunal dismissed this technical objection, stating that PFC, being a lead member of the CoC, acted based on the CoC's resolution with 89.6% votes in favor of appointing Mr. Binani. The Tribunal held that such technicalities should not hinder the application process.

5. Compliance with Section 22 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016:
The Tribunal confirmed that the CoC followed the necessary prerequisites under Section 22 of the IBC, 2016:
- The CoC passed the resolution with at least 66% voting shares.
- Written consent from the proposed RP, Mr. Sumit Binani, was obtained.
- An application was filed before the Tribunal for the appointment of the proposed RP.
- The Tribunal directed the Registry to forward Mr. Binani's name to the IBBI for confirmation.

The Tribunal concluded that the CoC's decision to replace Mr. Khandelwal with Mr. Binani was valid and in compliance with the IBC. Consequently, IA No. 235/2020 filed by Mr. Khandelwal was rejected, and the Registry was directed to seek confirmation from the IBBI for Mr. Binani's appointment as RP. The matter was scheduled for further proceedings on 16.06.2020.

---