2022 (9) TMI 803

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Section 22 of the IBC for replacement of IRP appointing another professional as the RP. 2. IA 650 of 2022 is filed by the Suspended Management of the Corporate Debtor opposing application No. 624 of 2022 filed by the CoC. 3. We heard learned senior counsel Mr. Navin Pahwa for the CoC, learned senior counsel Mr. Saurabh Soparkar for the IRP and learned senior counsel Mr. Satvik Verma for the Suspended Management. We perused the material on record in both applications. At the outset, we noted that Section 22(2) permit CoC to replace IRP by appointing any other professional as the RP, provided such resolution is passed by not less than 66% votes. Section 22(4) of IBC states that Adjudicating Authority to forward name of such RP to the IB....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....efaulter as per MCA website. 8. Learned senior counsel for the Suspended Management also relied on order of this Adjudicating Authority in IA No. 372 of 2021 where this Adjudicating Authority held that "IRP/RP should, in normal circumstances, be appointed on the basis of location of the Corporate Debtor". 9. We have considered the submissions of learned senior counsel for the CoC and learned senior counsel for the Suspended Management. It is seen from the material on record that the CoC in its second meeting held on 15.07.2022 decided to replace IRP. In fact, there is no much difference in between provisions of Section 22 of IBC and Section 27 of IBC except that the Section 22 of IBC to be invoked for replacement of IRP to the RP and ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ce the RP being part of it cannot be appointed as the RP. These allegations are denied by the CoC. 11. Learned Senior counsel for the CoC brought to our notice that at one point of time the MCA website was showing the firm as a defaulter but it was due to technical problem. In fact there was no delay in filing the annual returns by that firm. In our considered opinion, if there is any default on part of that firm then it is liable under the Companies Act, 2013. Mr. Ashish Chhawchharia's appointment cannot be objected on this ground. Moreover, in this case there is no evidence that said firm is really a defaulter. 12. It is also alleged that Mr. Ashish Chhawchharia is not local professional hence he may not be appointed. To buttres....