TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (3) TMI 685
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....B Code, 2016 and Regulations thereof. The parties' original status in the Company Petition represents the parties in this Appeal for the sake of convenience. 2. The Adjudicating Authority passed the following Order; "The applicant in the instant applications is, inter-alia seeking for directions against the RP for release of salaries and amount due and payable to him by the corporate debtor. On perusal of the counter affidavit along with the material papers, it is seen that the RP has acknowledged that certain amounts due and payable to the applicant herein. It is further observed that the RP has agreed for releasing salaries as per a statement enclosed to the reply. Considering the submissions, this Adjudicating Authority is of the view that any payment to be made to the Appellant herein shall be made in accordance with the provisions of the IB code 2016 and Regulation thereunder. Accordingly, this adjudicating Authority hereby directs the RP to make payment of the salary to the Appellant as per amount acknowledged by him and as per provisions of the IB code 2016 and Regulations thereunder." (verbatim copy) 3. Brief facts of the case are as under; The Respondent No.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... vide Application filed on 31 January 2019 to modify Order dated 19 December 2018 to release the salary dues by filing IA Nos. 47 and 48 of 2019. Being completely aware that his claim was squarely settled by the Adjudicating Authority vide Order dated 19 July 2018 and the said Order was never challenged and has attained finality. 6. It is further contended that the Adjudicating Authority committed a grave error in entertaining the Application IA Nos. 47 and 48 of 2019, which settles the claims of Respondent No 1 and approved the Resolution Plan as submitted by the Resolution Applicant, i.e. Respondent No 2. Thereby, the Adjudicating Authority has failed to follow the statutory provision of Section 31 (1) of the I&B Code 2016. 7. It is further contended that the Corporate Debtor's Insolvency Resolution Process completed on 15 June 2018, and the Resolution Plan was approved vide Order dated 19 July 2020. The impugned order results from the concealment of material facts of the previous round of litigation by Respondent No 1. 8. Respondent No. 1, in pursuance to the commencement of CIRP of the Corporate Debtor, submitted its claim with the Appellant by email dated 28 February 20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for the highly belated and enhanced claim amount, i.e. Rs. 20,38,300/-, from the Adjudicating Authority that too without any supporting documents to substantiate its claim. 14. Following issues arise for our determination; Whether the Adjudicating Authority can issue the directions to erstwhile Resolution Professional once the Resolution Plan under Section 31 of the I&B Code 2016 has been approved, and the Resolution Professional has been discharged of his duties? 15. We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 16. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that Respondent No .1 has approached the Adjudicating Authority by concealing material facts by which the impugned Order dated 4 August 2020 emanates. The payment of remuneration payable to Respondent No 1 was put to rest by the Adjudicating Authority by Order dated 19 July 2018 passed in IA No 208 of 2018. 17. The Adjudicating Authority by Order dated 19 July 2018 has decided the Application on merits wherein it is expressly held that Applicant/Respondent No. 1 "is entitled from 19 September 2017 to 20 October 2017 for a salary but not by way of a claim filed during the CIRP p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... before an appropriate forum in terms of Section 60(6) of the 'I&B Code'. The 'Financial Creditors' and the 'Operational Creditors' whose claims have been decided by the Adjudicating Authority or this Appellate Tribunal, such decision being final and is binding on all such 'Financial Creditors' and the 'Operational Creditors' in terms of Section 31 of the 'I&B Code'. Their total claims stand satisfied and, therefore, they cannot avail any remedy under Section 60(6) of the 'I&B Code'. The 'Financial Creditors' in whose favour guarantee were executed as their total claim stands satisfied to the extent of the guarantee, they cannot re-agitate such claim from the Principal Borrower." 21. The Application filed under Section 9 of the I&B Code, 2016 was admitted by the Adjudicating Authority vide Order dated 18 September 2017. The Resolution Plan approved by the Committee of Creditors with a vote share of 80.66%, further approved by the Adjudicating Authority by Order dated 19 July 2018. Any claim that Respondent No. 1 is raising towards the provision of its services during the CIRP ought to form part of the CIRP costs, trea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on Plan, without any liability whatsoever on the Corporate Debtor. 26. In case, Respondent No. 1 is treated as an Operational Creditor, then under section 30 (2) (b) of the Code payment to Operational Creditors under the Plan shall not be less than the amount payable to them in the event of liquidation of the company under Section 53 of the Code. 27. In the present case, as per Clause 7.4 (b) of the Resolution Plan, the liquidation value is payable to the employees other than workmen in the event of liquidation of the Corporate Debtor, according to section 53 of the Code is nil. However, to make the Resolution Plan equitable for employees, a total sum of Rs. 67 lakhs has proposed further for payment to the employees other than workmen, after 3 months from the commencement of the production. It is further specified that all past dues of the employees other than workers stand paid and discharged, and the Resolution Applicant shall have no liability in respect of the same. 28. Given the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Essar steel (supra), it is clear that an approved Resolution Plan is binding on all the stakeholders. The Successful Resolution Applican....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urther such determination has been upheld by the Adjudicating Authority. It has been over two years since the Corporate Debtor's CIR process concluded by approving the Resolution Plan of Respondent No.2, which has subsequently been given full effect by Respondent No. 2. 33. The timelines prescribed under the Code aim at speedy and time-bound resolution. Thus, the impugned Order of the present nature, which allows a highly belated claim, mainly when the Claimant displays an overtly callous attitude, should be nibbed in the bud. Adjudicating such delayed claims could defeat the Code's purpose and cause unnecessary hurdle in the effective implementation of any Resolution Plan. 34. It is pertinent to mention that this Appellate Tribunal in case of the state of Haryana v Uttam Strips & others Company Appeal (AP) (Ins) No.319 of 2020 while dealing with the similar issue where the State of Haryana did not properly file its claim before the Resolution Professional up to the prescribed time limit has held that since the Appellant failed to submit its claim before the Resolution Professional and the Resolution Plan submitted by Uttam Strips Private Limited was implemented. Therefor....