TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (4) TMI 333
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Allow the present Application; and (B) That this Tribunal may pass appropriate Orders and directions to the Respondent No. 1 to admit the entire Claim of the Applicant and register the same in the list of Claims. 2. It is the case of the Applicant that it has filed its claim as an Operational Creditor with the RP, in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) of the Corporate Debtor company, vide email dated 20.04.2018, to the tune of Rs. 16,41,67,107/- towards the work done for the construction of Singanpur Weir-cum-Causeway Project, briefly known as SWP, under a Tripartite Agreement, dated 09.11.1993 with its beneficiaries, i.e. Surat Municipal Corporation (SMC) and other Participating Industries, who have also provided free financial assistance to such project, where from the Corporate Debtor is drawing additional water. 3. It is the contention of the applicant that in the year 2009, the present Corporate Debtor along with another participating industry, viz., Larsen & Toubro (L & T) had sought permission for withdrawal of additional water for which it had agreed to pay their pro rata contribution as per the MoU. It is further submitted that Hazira Area I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y of the minutes of meeting dated 25.02.2013 and the copy of the letter dated 06.03.2013 by the Corporate Debtor company requesting for waiving the interest are annexed to the application as Annexure F-1 & F-2. However, all the participating Industries, including the Applicant herein, objected to the request of the waiver of the interest, as it was contrary to the Tripartite Agreement and the MoU, to which the Corporate Debtor company and the Applicant are signatories, along with other Participating Industries. The Applicant's letter dated 20.03.2013 addressed to the Corporate Debtor company and L & T, rejecting their request for waiver and the Minutes of Meeting dated 20.05.2013 convening rejection of their request for waiver of interest by all the Participating Industries and the email dated 16.02.2015 from the Corporate Debtor company requesting HAIA to finalize the interest amount is annexed to the application as Annexure G-1, G-2 &G-3. 7. It is further submitted that the Applicant, along with other Participating Industries, had informed the Corporate Debtor company and L & T that any partial sum paid by them would be first adjusted towards the interest amount only. Thereaft....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....015 of the Corporate Debtor by admitting interest liability. 11. Thereafter, the RP did not make any communication of rejection/acceptance of the claim in response to the letter of the Applicant dated 25.09.2018. 12. The RP has opposed the application and the relief being sought for through in its reply affidavit contending as such; It is submitted that the brief facts relevant to the instant Application are set out hereinbelow; 1) The Applicant has made a claim of INR 16,41,67,107/- in its proof of claim dated April 20, 2018 ("Amount Claimed") as an operational creditor. The Amount Claimed under the proof of claim document dated April 20, 2018 (hereinafter "Proof of Claim") pertain to commitment of additional water supply and drawal of additional water by the Corporate Debtor pursuant to the construction of the Singanpur Weir-cum-Causeway Project ("Project") and handing over of the Project back to the Surat Municipal Corporation ("SMC"), in terms of the Tripartite Agreement dated November 09, 1993 ("Tripartite Agreement") entered into between SMC and the various Participating Industries mentioned therein (which includes the Corporate Debtor) ("Participating Indus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rt in the matter of Swiss Ribbons (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India =2019 (1) TMI 1508 the resolution professional has no adjudicatory powers during the corporate insolvency resolution process. Thus, Respondent No.l, in the capacity of the Resolution Professional of the Corporate Debtors, would have no power to make a determination of whether the Interest Amount was actually payable by the Corporate Debtor to the Applicant, as he does not have the power to adjudicate upon such a dispute. In this respect, I submit as follows: (a) The issue relating to the payment of the Interest Amount by the Corporate Debtor to the Applicant has been pending for many years. (b) No invoice/debit note was attached by the Applicant to its Proof of Claim to substantiate the liability of the Corporate Debtor to pay the Interest Amount, and that only a 'provisional' debit note was provided by it, which itself shows that this amount has still not been determined. Thus, it is clear that the liability of the Corporate Debtor to pay the Interest Amount claimed is in dispute. (c) Further, the 'provisional' debit note submitted by the Applicant also seems to pertain to the liability of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... From the above, it is evident that the payment of the Interest Amount was never agreed between the parties, and it was only the payment of the Principal Amount that was contemplated and that was being requested for by the other Participating Industries. (e) Based on the above, it is clear that the Corporate Debtor seems to have categorically refuted and questioned its liability to pay the Interest Amount to the other Participating Industries. It is also evident that there has been no satisfactory response received from the Applicant in support of its claim that the Interest Amount is payable to it in this respect (5) It is in light of the above mentioned facts that Respondent No. 1 was of the opinion that there were insufficient document and information to prove the claim of the Applicant in respect of the Interest Amount payments, and that there was a dispute between the Corporate Debtor and the Applicant in this respect In light of this, it is submitted that Respondent No. 1 had validly rejected the Interest Amount claimed by the Applicant vide its Proof of Claim, vide e-mail dated April 20, 2018 (annexed to the Application as Annexure-I) and had....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eting of committee of creditors-(1) The members of the committee of creditor may meet in person or by such electronic means as maybe specified. (2) All meetings of the committee of creditors shall be conducted by the resolution professional. (3) The resolution professional shall give notice of each meeting of the committee of creditors to-_ (a) members of committee of creditors, including the authorized representatives referred to in sub-sections (6) and (6-A) of Section 21 and sub-section (5); (b) members of the suspended Board of Directors or the partners of the corporate persons, as the case maybe; (c) operational creditors or their representatives if the amount of their aggregate dues is not less than ten per cent of the debt." 16. Further, the duties of the RP are defined and described under Sections 25 and 29 of the Code, the relevant portion thereof are also being reproduced herein below; "25. Duties of resolution professional-(1) It shall be the duty of the resolution professional to preserve and protect the assets of the corporate debtor, including the continued business operations of the corporate debtor. (2) For the purpose....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by the resolution applicant to make the resolution plan for the corporate debtor, which shall include the financial position of the corporate debtor, all information related to disputes by or against the corporate debtor and any other matter pertaining to the corporate debtor as maybe specified." 17. Moreover, the RP's duty and responsibility, being an appointee of this Code are of a deemed public servant. Therefore, he is expected to follow the principles of natural justice, even in administrative action, like CIRP, as held in our previous decision in Numetal Ltd. v. Satish Kumar Gupta = 2018 (5) TMI 695, which has now been confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arcelormittal v. Satish Kumar Gupta [2018] 150 SCL 354 and in other judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Swiss Ribbons (P.) Ltd. (supra). 18. A perusal to the impugned letter dated 14.05.2018 goes to show that the RP himself left the column of reason blank for non-admission of the claim, which, in our view, is not in conformity with the provisions of the I 8b B Code. He was required to register the claim as put forth by the Operational Creditor after his verification from necessary vouchers and other documents t....