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>Tribunal rules professionals can't attend creditors' meetings or access CIRP docs</h1> <h3>M/s Propyl Packaging Limited Versus Mr. George Varkey</h3> M/s Propyl Packaging Limited Versus Mr. George Varkey - TMI Issues Involved:1. Whether an Advocate, Chartered Accountant, and Company Secretary of the Corporate Debtor can attend the meetings of the Committee of Creditors.2. Whether the Resolution Professional has to provide copies of all documents in connection with the CIRP to the professionals mentioned above.Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: Attendance of Professionals in CoC MeetingsThe Applicant, M/s. Propyl Packaging Limited, sought permission for their Advocate, Chartered Accountant, and Company Secretary to attend the meetings of the Committee of Creditors (CoC). The Applicant argued that these professionals could assist the Resolution Professional by providing necessary information and ensuring compliance with legal and financial requirements. They emphasized that the CIRP process is complex, and professional assistance is crucial for the Corporate Debtor to understand and navigate the process.The Resolution Professional countered that the application is not maintainable under Section 17 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), as the management of the Corporate Debtor vests with the IRP from the date of appointment. The powers of the Board of Directors are suspended and exercised by the IRP. The Resolution Professional argued that only Financial Creditors can attend CoC meetings as per Section 21 of IBC, and no other person can participate without the Resolution Professional's permission, as per Regulation 24 of the IBBI Regulations, 2016.The Tribunal examined the relevant provisions, including Section 21 and Section 24 of IBC, and Regulation 24 of the IBBI Regulations, 2016. It concluded that the Resolution Professional has the authority to manage the resolution process and ensure a balance of power between creditors and the debtor. The presence of professionals other than those specified in the regulations would not serve any purpose, as they would only be silent spectators without any voting rights.Issue 2: Provision of CIRP Documents to ProfessionalsThe Applicant also sought copies of all documents related to the CIRP process for their professionals. The Resolution Professional contended that it is within their discretion to appoint accountants, legal, and other professionals as per Section 25(2)(d) of IBC. They are not permitted to disclose any information pertaining to the CIRP to third parties, including the Applicant's professionals.The Tribunal agreed with the Resolution Professional's stance, emphasizing that the disclosure of CIRP documents to third parties is not allowed. The Resolution Professional must follow the due process specified by the IBBI and maintain confidentiality.Conclusion:The Tribunal dismissed the application, stating that allowing the Advocate, Chartered Accountant, and Company Secretary of the Corporate Debtor to attend CoC meetings would not serve any purpose. Furthermore, the request for CIRP documents was denied, as the Resolution Professional is not permitted to disclose such information to third parties. The Tribunal upheld the regulatory framework of the IBC and IBBI Regulations, ensuring that the resolution process is conducted within the prescribed legal boundaries.
TaxTMI 