Tribunal Upholds Appointment of Ashish Chhawchharia as Resolution Professional

The Tribunal approved the replacement of the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) with Mr. Ashish Chhawchharia as the Resolution Professional (RP) under Section 22 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). Despite objections raised by the Suspended Management on various grounds, including the RP's alleged defaulter status and lack of local presence, the Tribunal dismissed these objections as unsubstantiated. The CoC's decision to appoint Mr. Chhawchharia was upheld, emphasizing his expertise in handling stress assets. The RP was directed to take over promptly, and the IBBI was notified of his appointment in accordance with the IBC.

---

---

Issues:
1. Replacement of IRP with another professional as RP under Section 22 of IBC.
2. Opposition by Suspended Management on grounds of application under Section 27, location of RP, independence of RP, and alleged defaulter status of RP's firm.
3. CoC's power to replace IRP, appointment of Mr. Ashish Chhawchharia, objections raised by Suspended Management, and considerations for RP appointment.
4. Allegations of defaulter status of RP's firm, RP not being a local professional, and international presence of RP's firm.

Issue 1: Replacement of IRP with another professional as RP under Section 22 of IBC
The CoC filed IA 624 of 2022 seeking to replace the IRP with Mr. Ashish Chhawchharia as the RP. The CoC passed a resolution with 92.76% votes in favor of the appointment, which was duly consented to by Mr. Chhawchharia. The Tribunal accepted and approved the appointment, citing the provisions of Section 22 of IBC allowing such replacement.

Issue 2: Opposition by Suspended Management on various grounds
The Suspended Management filed IA 650 of 2022 opposing Mr. Chhawchharia's appointment as RP. Their objections included the application being under Section 27 instead of Section 22, the RP's location, lack of independence, and alleged defaulter status of the RP's firm. The Tribunal rejected these objections, emphasizing the CoC's authority to replace the IRP under Section 22 and the lack of substantial evidence supporting the objections raised.

Issue 3: CoC's power to replace IRP and considerations for RP appointment
The Tribunal analyzed the CoC's decision to replace the IRP, highlighting the requirements of Section 22 of IBC for passing such resolutions. It noted the absence of material supporting the Suspended Management's objections regarding the independence of Mr. Chhawchharia and upheld the CoC's decision to appoint him as the RP based on the available information.

Issue 4: Allegations of defaulter status and RP's firm not being a local professional
Allegations of the RP's firm being a defaulter as per the MCA website and Mr. Chhawchharia not being a local professional were raised. The CoC denied these allegations, explaining that any technical issues on the MCA website did not impact the RP's appointment. The Tribunal dismissed these allegations, emphasizing the RP's international presence and expertise in handling stress assets as justifying factors for his appointment.

In conclusion, the Tribunal rejected the objections raised by the Suspended Management, finding them unsubstantiated and aimed at delaying the CIRP process. It allowed the CoC's application to appoint Mr. Ashish Chhawchharia as the RP, directing the IRP to hand over documents and assets for the CIRP to proceed promptly. The Registry was instructed to inform the IBBI about Mr. Chhawchharia's appointment as per Section 22(5) of IBC.

---