TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (5) TMI 16
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erlocutory Application filed under section 60 (5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ('the Code') by BMS Commercial Private Limited. ('Applicant') against Kamalesh Kumar Singhania & Ors., praying for various reliefs, predominant being the following: 3. An order directing the respondents to forthwith issue a no-objection certificate and facilitate the transfer of premise No. 1, Camac Street, Kolkata, and premise No. 8, Camac Street, Kolkata-7000016. The financial creditors viz. State Bank of India and Indian Bank are arrayed as respondents. Facts of the Case 4. The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process ('CIRP') of Prime Retail India Limited was initiated, pursuant to an 'order of admission&#....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for completion Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process of the Corporate Debtor got over on 27.04.2020. Subsequently, various extensions have been granted by the IMC to the SRA for making payments. 6. Even though the upfront payment was made as per the plan, the Successful Resolution Applicant faltered in making the necessary payments in the scheduled time, due to various reasons cited in the application including predominantly the Pandemic. Therefore, due to non-payment by the SRA strictly as per the Resolution plan, the IMC recommended the matter to this Adjudicating Authority for ordering the liquidation of the corporate debtor. The SRA however contends that it had inter-alia proposed to sell the non-business assets of the CD for maki....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that the respondents have acted in contravention of the provisions of the resolution plan by causing a delay in granting such a no-objection certificate. Therefore, the period for compliance with the resolution plan could not have been computed as the Respondents have failed to provide the required certificate or no-objection in terms of the Resolution Plan. Therefore, the Respondents have acted in a mala fide and unfair manner in not providing such a certificate. 11. The Applicant submits that while the IMC was deliberating on the issue of granting extension to the SRA and also whether to press for the liquidation of the Corporate Debtor, it received a proposal for the sale of the 'non-business assets' of the Corporate Debtor an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndent. 15. However, during the hearings, the Ld. Counsel appearing for the financial creditors as well for the convener has not denied the contents of the payment chart on page 118 of the petition. 16. It has been submitted that the said properties which are being proposed for sale were in fact the security interest of both the banks namely the State Bank of India as well as Allahabad bank (now Indian Bank) and as such, they were in the process of getting requisite approvals from their competent authorities. 17. This Adjudicating Authority had directed the concerned bank authorities to be present in the court vide order dated 28.02.2022. 18. On the next date of hearing the Ld. Counsel appearing for the State Bank of India presen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es to the fore from the uncontested averments of the applicant is that the Implementation and Monitoring Committee (hereinafter 'IMC') has not properly facilitated and implemented the Resolution Plan and neither managed the operations of the business of the Corporate Debtor in a professional manner despite having taken over sometime in Feb-March 2021. While the operations at two business units at Rangoli Mall and Durgapur were not even restarted, the electricity connection to the main showroom of the corporate debtor at Kolkata was disconnected by the mall authorities due to nonpayment of electricity charges. 23. Further whereas IMC had extended the time for payment till 11.03.2021 as depicted in the minutes of the 4th meeting of....