National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
Sandeep Kumar Bhatt vs Ramit Rastogi on 6 December, 2024
Author: Ashok Bhushan
Bench: Ashok Bhushan
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 811 of 2024
IN THE MATTER OF:
Sandeep Kumar Bhatt ...Appellant
Versus
Ramit Rastogi & Anr. ...Respondents
Present:
For Appellant : Mr. Virender Ganda, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ayandeb
Mitra, Mr. Ashray Belal, Advocates
Mr. Sadeep Kumar Bhatt, RP in person
Mr. Kamal, CMA
For Respondent : Mr. Mansumyer Singh and Mr. Ramit Rastogi, Advocates
for Liquidator / R-1
Ms. Amrita Singh and Mr. Ankit Gupta, Advocates for R-
2/ IBBI.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode) 06.12.2024 Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant as well as the Learned counsel appearing for the IBBI and Learned Counsel for the Liquidator.
This Appeal has been filed against the order dated 29.02.2024 passed by Adjudicating Authority in I.A. No. 4916 of 2023. The Appellant before us is the erstwhile Resolution Professional of the Corporate Debtor. CIRP commenced on 03.08.2017 valuation reports were called for specifying liquidation value of Rs.62.29 lakhs and the 2nd CoC meeting, RP presented the liquidation value of 61.12 lakhs of the Corporate Debtor on the insolvency commencement date. In the 3rd CoC meeting, the RP while presented the accounts the resolution passed on the heading liquidation value following was minuted.
"Liquidation value "Resolved that liquidation value due to all creditors as per citified accounts as on Insolvency commencement date i.e. 3rd August 2017 of which details are as under is hereby approved-
(INR in lac)
Net Fixed Assets 12.14
Net Intangible Assets 6.83
Security Deposits for Rented 57.02
Premises
Balance with Government 32.55
Authority
VIP 79.54
Finished Goods 6.25
Book Debts below 6 months 154.32
FDR with Reliance Capital 6.21
Balance with bank in Margin 8.40
Account
Interest Accrued on FDR 5.86
Cash & bank Balance 4.77
Total Liquidation value due 428.98
to all creditors
Note: As all above are current assets as on Insolvency Commencement date so this values may change at the time of liquidation"
No plan was approved in CIRP hence the Corporate Debtor was put to liquidation and Liquidator was appointed. An order was passed on 22.01.2024 by Adjudicating Authority by which the order was kept in abeyance. The Adjudicating Authority is also passed an order 17.01.2023 were which order is to the following:
"ORDER IA-2276/2021 (u/s 54 IBC): Ld. Liquidator present in person submits that in compliance of the order dated 15.07.2022, it has already filed a report which is available on the DMS. He Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 811 of 2024 2 of 5 further submits that explanation for the difference in the liquidation value and the amount realized has been explained by him. However, we are not convinced. The moot point involved in the present application is whether the amount of Rs. 13,32,042/- realised in disposal of assets of CD i.e., against the estimated liquidation value of Rs. 4,28,98,000/- should be accepted, while considering the application for dissolution of the company under Section 54?
At this stage, Ld. Counsel appearing, for the IBBI sought to go through the details of the matter and file a report in the matter within 2 weeks. Ld. Counsel for RD Ms. Shankari Mishra undertook to inform the RoC about the development as above and requirement of filing the report by him in the matter without further delay.
Ld. Liquidator is directed to provide a copy of the IA, compliance report and complete set of documents to the Ld. Counsel for the IBBI as well as to the RoC by all modes including dasti within 2 days.
List on 14.02.2023."
It appears that IBBI initiated proceeding against the RP and he was suspended the IBBI has passed an order which is under challenge before the High Court pending in the LPA.
Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that he has already filed a final report and Form 'H' where the liquidation value of 61.12 lakhs was reflected. Counsel for the liquidator submitted he never received his Form 'H'.
Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the error which has been committed in the order dated 17.01.2023 was noticing the liquidation value of Rs.4,28,98,000/- which was not the liquidation value but was noted Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 811 of 2024 3 of 5 from the meeting of the CoC while which was presenting the account by the RP. The Adjudicating Authority in the impugned order has held that in paragraph 4. That in order dated 22.01.2024 the Adjudicating Authority has not recorded any finding, in paragraph 4 following has been observed:
"Qua the proceeding, in which two orders are sought to be recalled, the applicant herein was not even a party, thus, the situation mentioned in Rule 49(ibid) does not arise. It is further made clear that in none of orders, we have recorded any findings on merit and we have left it only to IBBI to take a view. It would be open for Mr. Sandeep Bhatt to place its viewpoint before IBBI. The application is misconceived and is accordingly rejected."
Adjudicating Authority ultimately by the impugned order has observed that there is no reason to vary the order dated 22.01.2024 which was kept in abeyance and the application was disposed of accordingly.
The submission which has advanced by Counsel for the Appellant is that it was only mistake regarding the liquidation value of Rs.4.28 cores. When minutes are read, it is clear that was only accounts were presented and that was not liquidation value of the Corporate Debtor and it was only book value.
The Adjudicating Authority itself have been clarified it has not given any finding in its earlier order and has only recorded the statement. The CIRP has already failed and liquidation has been directed and in so far as the proceeding against the Appellant by the IBBI, it is always open for the Appellant it places all facts and its submissions to substantiate that what was Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 811 of 2024 4 of 5 the correct liquidation value of the Corporate Debtor and what was as per the records available in the CIRP. We make it clear that, we in the present proceeding are not giving any finding with regard to liquidation value of the Corporate Debtor and it is for the appropriate authority wherever the issue arises to consider all aspects and take a decision in accordance with law. With these observations, we dispose of the Appeal.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson [Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) pks/kam Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 811 of 2024 5 of 5