Weekly Digest Of IBC Cases: 8 To 21 August 2023

NCLAT NCLAT Delhi Upholds Reduction Of Resolution Professional’s Fee By NCLT Case Title: Rohit J. Vora v Religare Finvest Ltd. & Ors. Case No.: Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No. 104 of 2023 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), New Delhi Bench, comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Shri Barun Mitra (Technical Member), has upheld the NCLT order whereby the fee of the Resolution Professional was reduced from Rs. 3.75 Lakhs + GST to Rs. 1 Lakh + GST. The Bench observed that there was deficiency in the Resolution Professional’s performance, such as failure to publish Form G, invite Expression of Interest and to obtain any successful resolution plan for the Corporate Debtor within 180 days from the initiation of CIRP. “Given the material on record and the facts and circumstances in the present matter, we are therefore inclined to agree with the finding of the Adjudicating Authority that the active CIRP period having expired with no substantial work to be taken up further and the Covid pandemic also having generally disrupted work, the scaling down of the fees to Rs 1 lakh was not discriminatory or unfair.” Differential Payments Can Be Made To Assenting And Dissenting Unsecured Financial Creditors: NCLAT Delhi Case Title: Peter Beck and Partner Vermoegensverwaltung GMBH v Sharon Bio-medicine Limited & Ors. Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 912 of 2023 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), New Delhi Bench, comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Shri Barun Mitra (Technical Member), has held that differential payments can be made between the unsecured Financial Creditors who voted in favour of the plan and the ones who voted against it. The Bench ruled that, “we are of the view that assenting financial creditors entitled for payment as proposed in the plan and dissenting financial creditor is entitled as per the minimum entitlement as per Section 30(2)(b).” Go Airlines | NCLAT Delhi Permits Lessor To Conduct Inspection Of Leased Aircraft Engines Case Title: Engine Lease Finance B.V. v Resolution Professional of Go Airlines (India) Ltd. & Anr. Case No.: Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No.1088 of 2023 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), New Delhi Bench, comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Shri Barun Mitra (Technical Member), while adjudicating an appeal filed in Engine Lease Finance B.V. v Resolution Professional of Go Airlines (India) Ltd. & Anr., has permitted the lessor of aircraft engines of Go Airlines to conduct inspection of the leased engines. “We are of the view that inspection be permitted within 10 days from today. As observed above, the observations made in the impugned order being at prima facie stage need not be treated as final expression of opinion by the Adjudicating Authority and all contention of both the parties are left open.” NCLAT Chennai Reprimands Bank For Filing Appeal With Delay, Refuses To Condone Case Title: DCB Bank Limited v Ramakrishnan Sadasivam & Ors. Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 207/2023 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), Chennai Bench, comprising of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member) and Ms. Shreesha Merla (Technical Member), has reprimanded the conduct of a Bank which filed an appeal exactly on the 45th day, despite having huge machinery at its disposal to prepare and file the appeal within statutory period of 30 days. “Looking from any another angle, even if it is taken then that the appeal has been filed on 15th day of the extended period of 15 days even then there is no sufficient cause assigned by the Appellant as to why it had taken exactly 45 days in filing the appeal against the order dated 03.03.2022. The reasons are conspicuous by its absence especially when the Appellant is a Bank who had huge machinery at its disposal for the purpose of preparing the appeal and filing the same within the statutory period of 30 days.” IBC | Sec. 9 Petition Not Maintainable Against Claim For Compensation Penalty Under A Contract: NCLAT Delhi Case title: Chandrashekhar Exports Pvt. Ltd. v Babanraoji Shinde Sugar & Allied Industries Ltd. Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1032 of 2023 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), New Delhi Bench, comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Shri Barun Mitra (Technical Member), has upheld the dismissal of a petition under Section 9 of IBC which was filed based on claim of compensation penalty under a contract. The Bench held that whether a claim for compensation penalty has crystallized or not is to be adjudicated by a competent Court and not the Adjudicating Authority. NCLAT Chennai Stays Insolvency Proceedings Against Café Coffee Day’s Parent Company Case Title: Malavika Hegde v Indusind Bank Ltd. & Anr. Case No.:...

Weekly Digest Of IBC Cases: 8 To 21 August 2023

Pallavi Mishra

Tags