TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (11) TMI 1023
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... interlocutory application filed by the resolution professional named Mr. Amit Gupta (hereinafter called the "applicant" or the "RP") under section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter called the "Code"). The applicant is the resolution professional of Unimark Remedies Ltd. (hereinafter called as the "corporate debtor"), whose insolvency resolution process had been initiated by an application under section 7, filed by ICICI Bank Ltd. which was admitted by this Tribunal vide an order dated April 3, 2018. The applicant was subsequently confirmed as the resolution professional of the corporate debtor in the first meeting of the committee of creditors (CoC). 2. Through this present application, the applicant seeks a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as delivered on September 11, 2019 whereby the learned Judicial Member allowed the application and directed the appointment of an independent valuer for a fresh valuation of the corporate debtor, while the learned Technical Member differed and dismissed the application. Further M. A. No. 354 of 2019 was also dismissed as infructuous by that Bench. 6. Later, this order dated September 11 2019 of the then Bench was challenged by the applicant before the hon'ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal by an appeal bearing No. Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1078 of 2019. This appeal was disposed of on October 17, 2019 with the following observation : "In the facts and circumstances, we are of the view that 'resolution ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... argued at length before this Bench and was reserved for order on December 12, 2020 and on January 26, 2020 this Special Bench disposed the M. A. bearing No. 1406 of 2019 with the following directions : "Therefore, it is ordered that the resolution professional take steps to appoint a fresh valuer with a limited scope of valuing the intangible asset considering the International Standard of Valuation of a Pharmaceutical Co., and submit his report within a period of two weeks of receipt of the order copy and the CoC is directed to reconsider the valuation submitted by the third valuer. The misc. application is disposed of with the above direction." 7. The applicant added that the intangible assets were valued at zero/nil....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Nallasenapathy (Member Technical). This application was filed by ESIC against the non-consideration of its claim which was submitted to the applicant after over three months of CoC approval of the resolution plan of ARCIL Consortium. While hearing this application, the hon'ble Judicial Member enquired about the status of M. A. No. 1406 of 2019 being the Corporation Bank application, which was referred to Smt. Suchitra Kanuparthi on account of the split verdict. Counsel for the applicant informed the Bench about the order dated January 20, 2020 and the steps taken by him in compliance with the said order, i. e., appointment of a fresh valuer namely GAA Advisory for valuing the intangible assets of the corporate debtor considering the Int....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to assist us for appointing a suitable valuer. List this matter on March 17, 2020 for further consideration." 10. On March 17, 2020 the matter was listed for hearing but was not taken up and adjourned on account of the outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic and the preventive measures taken to control its spread. Meanwhile, the applicant approached the hon'ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal by way of Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 418 of 2020, challenging the direction of fresh valuation as made by the order dated January 20, 2020 of the Special Bench of Smt. Suchitra Kanuparthi, Member Judicial. The hon'ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal vide an order dated March 13, 2020 disposed of the said appeal, dec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....opposed this application stating her lack of faith on the said valuer. Findings We have heard all the parties concerned and taken all the documents submitted by them into consideration. It is observed that the applicant who is the resolution professional as well as the CoC wants to continue with the same valuer, i. e., GAA Advisory who is well aware of the facts of the case and has done valuation of the corporate debtor earlier. On the other hand, the Corporation Bank does not have faith on the CoC, the RP as well as the GAA Advisory and therefore, wants this Tribunal to appoint a fresh valuer for conducting the valuation process. We are of the opinion that the Corporation Bank holds approximately only about 7 per cent. of the shar....