TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 1579
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vital issue had came up for consideration before this Appellate Tribunal in the shape of the instant Company Appeal, from the impugned order. That is in relation to the restrictions which are being imposed against the Counsel representing the cause of the Appellant, owing to fact that the Advocate Mr. R. Subramaniam, who was representing the cause of the Appellant, was himself was a Judgment Debtor and had a conflicting interest, was rendered non-suited to represent the cause of the Appellant as a Professional. The Liquidator had filed various Interlocutory Applications in the proceedings through Mr. R. Subramaniam, the Ld. Counsel, who was engaged by him. 2. An issue for consideration came up which is that, the Counsel representing t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tions, 2016. 4. Because of the above said revelations, an application was preferred by the Liquidator, being MA / 261 / IB / 2019, wherein the direction was sought for, that since the Counsel for the Liquidator had disclosed his relationship with the ICICI Bank and the Liquidator has reported the information with the IBBI, the required disclosure by the Counsel for the Liquidator and his relationship with the Respondent was required to be taken into consideration for the purposes of continuance as the Counsel for the Liquidator. 5. The supporting Affidavit, which was filed in support of MA / 261 / IB/ 2019, in the Affidavit the Liquidator submitted that, the Counsel had in 2017 itself disclosed his relationship with multiple Banks all....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... whereby a direction was issued to the IBBI Board, to take a call upon as to, whether at all the Insolvency Professional, has breached any of the Regulations of the IBBI and further to determine as to whether Mr. R. Subramaniam, the Ld. Advocate, has any locus standi or a Professional right to represent in the instant Company Appeal, for the Appellant, who is the Liquidator. But, however, this controversy had been subsequently laid to rest because, the license to practice as an Advocate of Mr. R. Subramaniam, who earlier represented the cause of Mr. V. Nagarajan, the Liquidator, has already been suspended by the Bar Council. In that eventuality, once his license has been suspended, he cannot represent the cause of the Appellant, as his Coun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../ DRO, Chennai are directed to take steps U/s. TNPID Act to attach the properties of all accused companies and non accused companies and the properties of promoter, partner, director, manager or member of the said Financial Establishments and Companies for settlement to all the depositors without deviating and obeying any order passed by Honourable High Court of Madras in Company Jurisdiction / or other Jurisdiction. 44) This Court passed the above said orders obeying and in line with the orders passed by Honourable High Court of Madras in Company Jurisdiction / or other Jurisdiction to avoid multiplicity of Criminal Proceedings before this court since the Criminal Case is ended today. Nature of Disposal : Conviction ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he cause of the Appellant during the period of suspension of his license to act as a Professional cannot be said to be bad in the eyes of law and that too, more particularly when Mr. R. Subramaniam who was having a conflicting interest is an issue which had been decided by the Ld. Tribunal. 12. In the instant Company Appeal too, which was preferred through Mr. R. Subramaniam, who is the then Counsel with regard to which the Appellant had filed a Memo on 20.11.2025 admitting the fact that, the license of Mr. R. Subramaniam has been suspended by the Bar Council of Telangana, and his right to practice has been withdrawn by the Registering Body. Hence, he cannot act as a Professional, it is because of that reason too the new Counsel has been....