TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (6) TMI 618
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ty, Advocate Mr. Yash Vardhan Deora, Advocate For the Resolution Professional : Mr. Shaunak Mitra, Advocate Mr. Arun Kumar Gupta, P.C.A ORDER Rajasekhar V.K., Member (Judicial) 1. The present I.A. has been filed by Allahabad Bank (Indian Bank after amalgamation) under section 33(3) read with section 74(3) and section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("Code"). Submissions of Mr. Om Narayan Rai, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant 2. The Respondent No.1, KND Engineering Technologies Limited, was admitted into Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process ("CIRP") on an application made by Mr. Subrata Sarkar under section 9 of the Code registered as CP (IB) No. 455/KB/2018. 3. The Interim Resolution Profess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Adjudicating Authority. f. Rs.12,00,000/- (Rupees Twelve Lakh only) to the public shareholders within one month from the date of approval of the Resolution Plan by the Adjudicating Authority. 5. This Adjudicating Authority approved the Resolution Plan on 12 June 2019. The Respondent No. 2 has been committing serious breach of terms of the approved Resolution Plan. 6. The Applicant wrote to the Respondent No. 2 requesting for implementation of the Resolution Plan but the Resolution Applicant failed to make payments to the Applicant. 7. The Respondent No. 2 in its letter dated 15 September 2020 wrote that it would be getting Rs.33,00,00,000/- (Rupees thirty-three crore only) that it had deposited with the Registrar, Hon'bl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0/- 12. According to the approved Resolution Plan, the successful Resolution Applicant has made the following payments to the Applicant: a. Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees one crore only) in August 2019; b. Rs.1,22,00,000/- (Rupees one crore twenty-two lakh only) in December 2019; c. Bank Guarantees were returned to the Applicant after July 2019 for a total sum of Rs.70,92,000/- (Rupees seventy lakh ninety-two thousand only); d. Pay Order of Rs.1,50,00,000/- (Rupees one crore fifty lakh only) was offered to the Applicant on May 2021. 13. The Resolution Plan was approved wherein it was stated that majority of the repayment was on the basis of disposal of the properties that were mortgaged to the Bank. 14....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....20. The successful Resolution Applicant has taken steps to implement the Resolution Plan and it is only due to the Covid-19 Pandemic that there is a delay in such implementation of the Resolution Plan. Rejoinder by Mr. Om Narayan Rai, learned Counsel to the submissions made by the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and 5 21. The Applicant Bank was paid a sum of Rs.96,00,000/- (Rupees ninety-six lakh only) and not Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees one crore only). As per the payment schedule, the successful Resolution Applicant was to make a payment of Rs.10,00,00,000/- (Rupees ten crore only) within nine month from the effective date i.e. 12 March 2020. The lockdown for Covid-19 pandemic began on 25 March 2020. 22. The Respondent No. 2 sought to enter ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 to 3 and 5. Respondent No. 4 was set ex-parte vide order dated 28 December 2021. 26. On perusal of the record, it is seen that the successful Resolution Applicant has implemented half of the plan and according to the Respondents, payments have been made to the other creditors. 27. The Respondents have given One Time Settlement offers to the Applicant, but the Applicant has refused to accept the same and has also refunded the amount given as guarantee. 28. The conduct of the successful Resolution Applicant does reflect poorly on the successful Resolution Applicant and whether the successful Resolution Applicant should be given an opportunity to make the payments as resolved under ....