Weekly Digest Of IBC Cases: 13th To 19th November 2023

NCLAT In Absence Of Rental Agreement Between Parties, RP Can’t Demand Payment Of Usage Charges For Corporate Debtor’s Machine; NCLAT Delhi Case Title: Patsons Construction v Shri Ram Ratan Kanoongo Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1269 of 2022 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), Principal Bench, comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Shri Barun Mitra (Technical Member) and Shri Arun Baroka (Technical Member), has set aside a direction passed by the NCLT requiring a creditor to pay usage charges of a machine to the Corporate Debtor in absence of any rental agreement. Prior to initiation of CIRP, the Corporate Debtor had given its Machine to an Operational Creditor to settle certain outstanding payments. The Operational Creditor was in possession of Machine for 2 years. Post CIRP commencement, the Resolution Professional filed an application before NCLT seeking handover of the Machine and payment of usage charge by the Operational Creditor to the Corporate Debtor at the rate of Rs. 2 Lakhs per month (total Rs. 48 Lakhs). The Bench held that in absence of any rental agreement between Parties in respect of the Machine, no usage charges can be demanded by the Resolution Professional. NCLAT Delhi: Appellants Who Filed Their Claims As Real Estate Allottees Are A Part Of Home Buyers And Cannot Ask Refund Separately Case Title: Rajib Biswas & Anr. Vs Arena Superstructures Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Case No.: Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1488 of 2022 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), Delhi Bench, comprising of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member) and Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member), has held that the Appellants, who have filed their claims as Real Estate Allottees, are considered part of the home buyers. Therefore, if the home buyers have already been represented by an authorized representative who has approved the resolution plan, the Appellants cannot ask for a refund separately. NCLT ArcelorMittal’s Resolution Plan For Essar Steel, A Creditor Files Recall Application; NCLT Ahmedabad Issues Notice Case Title: State Bank of India v Essar Steels Ltd Case No.: CP(IB) 40 of 2017 The National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”), Ahmedabad Bench, comprising of Shri Shammi Khan (Judicial Member) and Dr. Velamur G Venkata Chalapathy (Technical Member), has issued notice in an application seeking recall of the order dated 08.03.2019 whereby the resolution plan of ArcelorMittal India Pvt. Ltd. was approved for Essar Steels India Ltd. by the NCLT. The Applicants are creditors of Essar Steels India Ltd., who have alleged that the plan approval order was obtained by casting fraud upon the NCLT by the Resolution Professional, ArcelorMittal India Pvt. Ltd. and their concerned legal team. NCLT Ahmedabad Rejects Resolution Plan For Failing To Address Issues Of Cash Flow, Value Of Assets And Statutory Dues Case Title: Eco Green Products Private Limited v Gajanand Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Case No.: CP(IB)/70(AHM)2021 The National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”), Ahmedabad Bench, comprising of Mrs. Chitra Hankare (Judicial Member) and Dr. Velamur G Venkata Chalapathy (Technical Member), has declined to approve a resolution plan which failed to address the issue of cash flows, value of assets, statutory dues and proposed payment of merely Rs. 1,000/- towards employees’ dues. “The Resolution Plan does not address the cash flows and value of the Assets enumerated and the Operational Debt claims received from Statutory Authorities. The valuation report (only a summary is submitted) of the assets is not satisfactory. The Resolution Plan presupposes approval and ignores the claim that has been received from the Income Tax Department of dues to be paid. It also proposes to pay only Rs 1000 to employees in 90 days after the approval of the Plan. The Resolution Plan is rejected as it does not satisfy the provisions of Section 31(2) of IBC 2016 and Regulations 36 of the Act of the Code.” NCLT Mumbai Urges IBBI To Conduct Training Session For Forensic Auditors Regarding Avoidance Transactions Under IBC Case Title: IDBI Bank Limited v Pawar Electro Systems Pvt. Ltd. Case No.: C.P.(IB) No. 1587/MB/2019 The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai Bench, comprising of Justice V.G. Bisht (Retd.) (Judicial Member) and Shri Prabhat Kumar (Technical Member), has urged the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (“IBBI”) to look into qualitative aspect of Forensic and Transaction Auditor’s Report and to conduct training session for concerned Auditors on provisions relating to Avoidance Transactions under IBC. “The IBBI may look into the qualitative aspect of Forensic and Transaction Auditor’s Report and may consider to hold one training session so as to equip them with the basic nuances of provisions relation to Avoidance Transactions contained in the Code and ...

Weekly Digest Of IBC Cases: 13th To 19th November 2023

Pallavi Mishra

Tags