Whether when resolution has been passed by CoC deciding to replace Interim Resolution Professional(IRP), the IRP can be heard in questioning the resolution? – Kairav Anil Trivedi, IRP of Parenteral Drugs India Ltd. v. State Bank of India (Erstwhile CoC) & Anr. – NCLAT New Delhi

Hon’ble NCLAT held that: (i) The mere fact that in the Resolution which was placed before e-voting, there was alternate resolution both under Sections 22 and 27 cannot be read to mean that there is any infirmity in the resolution passed for replacement with 100% vote. (ii) When the Resolution has been passed by the CoC in accordance with the provisions of the IBC deciding to replace the IRP, IRP cannot be heard in questioning the resolution on the ground that present was not a case where IRP could have been replaced by another Resolution Professional. (iii) NCLAT fails to see that how the CoC can be charged with non-cooperation. As per the scheme of the IBC, the CIRP has to be under control and supervision of the CoC and various actions of the IRP/RP require approval of the CoC. In the said facts of the present case, IRP is making allegation against the CoC and not acting in accordance with the order of the Adjudicating Authority.

Related Posts:

If any Public depositor applies showing due of the debt claiming itself as operational creditor and the Resolution Professional or the Tribunal do not accept the claim on the ground that they are not financial creditor, we allow the appellant to raise the question before the Tribunal and if any adverse decision is given by the Tribunal, it will be open to the appellant to raise the issue before NCLAT- Hind Motors India Ltd. Vs. Adjudicating Authority NCLT, Chandigarh – NCLAT New Delhi

IBC-Case Laws-NCLAT
Scroll to Top