The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Chennai Bench comprising Justice M. Venugopal and Ms. Shreesha Merla was hearing an appeal filed by the Resolution Professional and held that the appellant, who was no longer connected to the case and lacked standing, could not claim unpaid fees from the Committee of Creditors of a different project of the Corporate Debtor, thus upholding the dismissal of the appellant's application.
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) issued a judgment regarding an appeal filed by Mr. Ashok Kriplani, the Erstwhile Resolution Professional (RP) of 'Dreamz Infra India Ltd.' The appeal challenged the dismissal of his application (I.A. No. 168 of 2022) seeking intervention in C.P. (IB) No. 83/BB/2021 due to unpaid Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) costs.
Mr. Kriplani filed I.A. No. 414 of 2023 seeking condonation of a 145-day delay in filing the appeal and an additional 42-day condonation for filing the present appeal. The NCLAT granted the condonation of delay based on satisfactory reasons mentioned in an affidavit, pursuant to a previous application filed on 29.03.2023.
The first respondent argued that Mr. Kriplani had delayed requesting a certified copy of the order and sent a reminder on 18.03.2023, attaching a copy dated 07.10.2022. However, the NCLAT found the reasons for the delay in sending the reminder satisfactory and decided to condone the delay.
The records revealed that CIRP was initiated against Dreamz Infra India Ltd. on 20.08.2019, and Mr. Kriplani was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP), later becoming the RP on 17.12.2019. Due to a directive from the Adjudicating Authority on 04.09.2020, Mr. Kriplani filed I.A. No. 168 of 2022, seeking a decision on the unpaid CIRP cost before admitting the case of the second respondent, C.P. (IB) No. 83/BB/2021.
However, it was noted that Mr. Kriplani had been removed from his role as RP on 08.03.2021, and Mr. Konduru Prasanth Raju replaced him. As a result, Mr. Kriplani no longer had any connection or authority in C.P. (IB) No. 84/BB/2019 or C.P. (IB) No. 83/BB/2021.
Considering that Mr. Kriplani was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional/Resolution Professional in another project (C.P. (IB) No. 84/BB/2019), the NCLAT concluded that he could not seek unpaid fees/costs from the Committee of Creditors in another project of the Corporate Debtor. Therefore, the NCLAT upheld the Adjudicating Authority's decision to dismiss I.A. No. 168 of 2022 in C.P. (IB) No. 83/BB/2021. The Appellant was advised to pursue any further remedies in accordance with the law. No costs were awarded, and pending Interlocutory Applications (IAs) were closed.
Comentarios