TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (7) TMI 776
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with prayer to appoint new Interim Resolution Professional. 2. The brief facts of the case are: 2.1 CP(IB) 397 of 2018 was filed under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred as "IB Code") by M/s. Abhinandan Multitrade Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. which was admitted vide order dated 06.09.2019 whereby Interim Resolution Professional (hereinafter referred as "IRP") was appointed. After taking the charge, IRP made public announcement and thereafter, Committee of Creditors (hereinafter referred as "CoC") was constituted. 2.2 In the 1st CoC meeting held on 16.10.2019, IRP provided the list of Financial Creditors along with the voting share for each cred....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly admitted the claim without the same being verified completely but has also assigned voting rights to the creditors which caused the voting share of secured Financial Creditors to be reduced to only 36.53%. 2.5 In view of such situation, the whole problem has aroused with regard to the appointment of IRP/RP as no majority could be reached into for appointment of IRP/RP. Consequently, the instant application was filed apart from other miscellaneous applications. The Applicant along with other creditors has apprehended that IRP has not conducted any diligence on whether the 30 Non Financial Institutions are in anyway related to promoters or part of the promoter group. While putting queries to this issue by the Applicant, IRP/RP mer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... except which is expressly admitted to be true and correct. 4. The Respondent submitted that the unsecured loan raised from the other Financial Creditors are duly reflected in the Annual Balance Sheets of the Corporate Debtor which have been in a public domain and is available with the Applicant/ other consortium Banks, who have considered credit facilities. Hence, the allegation with regard to 1st CoC meeting is redundant. The voting share is determined on the basis of the claim value, duly supported by the documents filed by the Financial Creditors along with their claim. The Respondent further submitted that IRP/RP has limited role in such cases as contained under Regulation of CIRP Regulations 2016. 5. Further, during the pendency....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....red Financial Creditors and unsecured Financial Creditors. Consequent upon which at the time of voting for the appointment of IRP/RP, the majority of 66% of voting share could not be achieved which is the main root cause of conflict. 9. On perusal of the record, it is found that secured Financial Creditors has proposed the name of Mr. Sanjay Gupta as the new IRP of the Corporate Debtor to which the Respondent i.e. IRP as well as some of the Financial Creditors did not agree, which is the main cause of stalemate. 10. It is pertinent to mention herein that the CP(IB) 397 of 2018 was admitted on 06.09.2019 and after the 1st CoC meeting, the dispute with regard to the appointment of IRP arose because of difference in voting shar....