The Hon’ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal overturned NCLT’s decision to deny the Financial Creditor’s assignee’s (Appellant’s) request to withdraw the Corporate Debtor’s CIRP and lift the suspension of CoC’s operation and instructed NCLT to reinstate the request and issue new orders based on the application’s merits.

The Appellant had contended that RP assumed the role of an Adjudicating Authority and rejected its request to present the information about the withdrawal that was available to him to the Adjudicating Authority and that NCLT erred in concluding that RP had acted fairly and taken action per the requirements of IBC even though RP had broken the law’s mandate.

According to the Appellant’s argument that stated the RP purposefully failed to submit the CIRP withdrawal application to the Adjudicating Authority as required by the CIRP Regulations because it was submitted before the formation of the CoC and instead created the CoC, the Appellate Tribunal found that the RP, by creating the CoC after the CIRP withdrawal application was submitted “…had acted not in tune with the intention of the Amendment dated 25.07.2019 brought in the CIRP Regulations, 2016.”

The NCLAT additionally noted that the Appellant was qualified to request withdrawal under Section 12A of the IBC and Regulation 30A of the CIRP Regulations if it were the Financial Creditor and noted that by establishing CoC, has foiled an attempt by the Appellant to withdraw before CoC’s formation per Regulation 30A(1)(a).

 Finally, concluding that “…keeping in mind a pivotal fact that the Appellant/Assignee of ‘JSBL’, is an ‘Applicant’ for ‘CIRP Regulations’ and also because the ‘person’ to whom debt has been legally assigned or transferred is also a ‘Financial Creditor’ as per Section 5(7) of the I B Code, 2016, there does not impede Law for it to reap the benefit of amendment to Regulation 30A(1) of CIRP Regulations…”. 

The NCLAT held that the opposing conclusions reached by NCLT in the challenged order are not supported by the law and grants the appeal.

agrud partners mumbai logo
Disclaimer

The Bar Council of India Rules expressly prohibit law firms from soliciting work and advertising directly or indirectly. The contents of this website are intended solely for general information and knowledge of the user and are not an offer of legal services or advertising, and neither does accessing the website create an advocate-client relationship. We do not provide legal advice through this website. Publications and thought leadership content published on the website are for informative purposes only. Hyperlinks to third-party websites are only for reference and do not imply endorsement by Agrud Partners. Agrud Partners and its partners/authors assume no liability for the accuracy or reliability of information on third-party websites or for any loss due to reliance on such information. The contents of this website and linked publications are protected under intellectual property laws. Restricted access areas on this website may be subject to additional usage terms.

This website uses cookies to enhance user experience and for website improvement. By using this website, you consent to our use of cookies.

For inquiries regarding our website’s compliance, please contact mumbai@agrudpartners.com