Tribunals and CommissionsFull Bench(2024) 03 NCLAT CK 3461

Bank Of Maharashtra vs Mr. Reetesh Kumar Agarwal & Anr.

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi · Decided on 12 March 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ashok Bhushan, Chairperson · Barun Mitra, Member (Technical) · Arun Baroka, Member (Technical)
CASE NUMBER
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 454 of 2024 & I.A. No. 1587 of 2024

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 563 words

ORDER

12.03.2024: Heard Learned Counsel for the parties.

2.

This Appeal has been filed against the order dated 09.01.2024 passed in IA No.2046/2022 which was filed by the liquidator seeking direction for payment of liquidation fee. The order of liquidation was passed by the Adjudicating Authority on 30.10.2019. Decision was taken by the Stakeholders’ Consultation Committee on 10.01.2020 for early dissolution of the Corporate Debtor and thereafter the meeting of the Stakeholders’ Consultation Committee took place on 10.01.2020. The Application was filed on 03.02.2020 by the liquidator seeking early dissolution of the Corporate Debtor. Application remains pending and could be disposed of on 21.02.2022 dissolving the Corporate Debtor. Liquidator thereafter on 13.04.2022 filed the IA which has been allowed by the impugned order.

3.

Counsel for the Appellant challenging the order submits that when the application for dissolution was filed, no function was performed by the liquidator and further there was no decision to continue to pay Rs.25,000/-fee per month and the Adjudicating Authority relying on the payments made by the another Financial Creditor has directed for payment.

4.

Learned Counsel for the Liquidator refuted the submissions and submits that the liquidator had filed application and carried on liquidator to prosecute the application, hence, the payment of Rs.25,000/- per month was not incorrect.

5.

We have considered the submissions of the Counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6.

The resolution on which reliance is placed by both the parties is the resolution of the Stakeholders’ Consultation Committee dated 10.01.2020 where on Item No.7, following has been recorded:-

“7.

To vote for rectification of Liquidation Process Board costs, expenses and disbursement of payment as per Regulation 4 of IBBI (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016.

The Chairperson inform to SCC that Rs.8,583/- with monthly Rs.25,000/- Liquidator fee was incurred as out of pocket expenses as per Regulation 4 of IBBI (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016 that rectification of Liquidation process Board costs, expenses and disbursement of payment of work done during the liquidation period on dated 30/10/2019 to till now.

And it is resolved by the SCC to rectify these out of pocket expenses of Rs.8,583/- with monthly Rs.25,000/- disbursed it from both SCC members as per their claimed percent.”

7.

When we look into the aforesaid minutes, it is clear that under the aforesaid minutes, the Stakeholders’ Consultation Committee rectified the expenses and fee of Rs.25,000/- per month. It is submitted by the Appellant that the aforesaid fee continue to be paid till March, 2021 and thereafter no payment has been made. When we look into the minutes, it is not the decision of the Stakeholders’ Consultation Committee that the fee of Rs.25,000/- per month should be payable after filing of the application till application is disposed of.

8.

The Adjudicating Authority in the impugned order has observed that since American Express Banking Corporation has paid his share, the Appellant should also pay his share. Adjudicating Authority has not adverted to the minutes of the Stakeholders’ Consultation Committee nor has found any decision where decision was taken to continue to pay liquidator’s fee of Rs.25,000/- per month. We, thus, are of the view that the direction to make the payment by the Appellant is unsubstantiated and cannot be maintained.

9.

The Appeal is allowed. We make it clear that whatever amount has already been paid to the Liquidator may not be asked to refund.