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 denies Corporate Debtor's request for bank account changes & IRP removal during CIRP stay</h1> <h3>Chandra Shekhar Jha & Anr. Versus Religare Enterprises Ltd. & Ors.</h3> Chandra Shekhar Jha & Anr. Versus Religare Enterprises Ltd. & Ors. - TMI Issues Involved:The issues involved in the judgment are:1. Application for restoration of authorized signatories in bank accounts and removal of Interim Resolution Professional.2. Application for clarification by the Interim Resolution Professional.Application for Restoration of Authorized Signatories and Removal of Interim Resolution Professional:In this case, the Corporate Debtor filed an application seeking the restoration of its authorized signatories in bank accounts and the removal of the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) from the list of authorized signatories. The Appellate Tribunal had earlier passed an interim order staying the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) but directed that the Corporate Debtor cannot alienate its assets during this period.The Corporate Debtor relied on a previous judgment of the Tribunal in 'Ashok Kumar Tyagi vs. UCO Bank & Anr.' where it was held that even if the CIRP order is stayed, the Corporate Debtor cannot be put back to its previous position. The Tribunal emphasized that merely staying the CIRP does not entitle the Corporate Debtor to resume its previous functions. The Tribunal rejected the application filed by the Corporate Debtor for restoration of authorized signatories, stating that the conditions set in the previous case cannot be applied in the present situation.Application for Clarification by Interim Resolution Professional:Another application was filed by the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) seeking clarification in light of the stay on the CIRP process. The Tribunal clarified that due to the stay, the IRP is not allowed to proceed further in the CIRP process. However, the IRP is directed to ensure that the Corporate Debtor continues to operate as a going concern.In conclusion, the Tribunal disposed of the application filed by the IRP with the observation that the IRP should maintain the Corporate Debtor as a going concern during the stay on the CIRP process.
TaxTMI 