Tribunal Clarifies Moratorium Scope under I&B Code, Emphasizes Project-Specific 'Reverse CIRP'

The Tribunal clarified that the moratorium under Section 14 of the I & B Code, 2016 applies to the entire Corporate Debtor, protecting all assets and liabilities. The 'Reverse CIRP' mechanism was specified to be project-specific, confined to the "Winter Hills-77" project and not extending to other projects like "Monsoon Breeze-II." The IRP's role in the 'Reverse CIRP' is primarily to oversee the completion of the specific project and ensure compliance with Tribunal orders, without taking over the management of the entire Corporate Debtor unless necessary.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Scope of the moratorium under Section 14 of the I & B Code, 2016.
2. Applicability of the 'Reverse CIRP' to other projects of the Corporate Debtor.
3. Role and responsibilities of the IRP in the context of 'Reverse CIRP'.

Summary:

Scope of the Moratorium under Section 14 of the I & B Code, 2016:
The Appellant sought clarification that the moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, should be limited to the "Winter Hills-77" project only and not extend to other assets or projects of the Corporate Debtor, Umang Realtech Pvt. Ltd. The IRP/Respondent argued that the moratorium applies to all assets and liabilities of the Corporate Debtor as a whole, not just specific projects. The Tribunal concluded that the moratorium, as per Section 14, is intended to cover the entire Corporate Debtor to protect its assets and facilitate its resolution.

Applicability of the 'Reverse CIRP' to Other Projects:
The Appellant contended that the 'Reverse CIRP' mechanism, as introduced in the Tribunal's order dated 04.02.2020, should be confined to the "Winter Hills-77" project and not affect other projects like "Monsoon Breeze-II." The Tribunal affirmed that the 'Reverse CIRP' is project-specific and does not extend to other projects of the Corporate Debtor. This was to ensure that the resolution process is confined to the particular project for which it was initiated, without impacting other projects.

Role and Responsibilities of the IRP in the Context of 'Reverse CIRP':
The Appellant argued that the IRP's role should be limited to overseeing the completion of the "Winter Hills-77" project and not extend to managing the entire Corporate Debtor. The IRP/Respondent maintained that his responsibilities include managing all assets and liabilities of the Corporate Debtor as per the I & B Code, 2016. The Tribunal clarified that the IRP's role in the 'Reverse CIRP' is primarily to supervise the completion of the specific project ("Winter Hills-77") and ensure compliance with the Tribunal's orders. The IRP is not to take over the entire management of the Corporate Debtor unless the 'Reverse CIRP' fails.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal disposed of the application, clarifying that the 'Reverse CIRP' is limited to the "Winter Hills-77" project and the moratorium under Section 14 should be deemed confined to this project only. This clarification was given considering the unique circumstances of the case and the evolving nature of the 'Reverse CIRP' concept. The Tribunal emphasized that this clarification should not be treated as a general interpretation of the moratorium provisions under the I & B Code, 2016.

---