NCLAT Dismisses Appeal by Financial Creditor Against IRP Fee Claim in Insolvency Case — Professional Fee of IRP Approved by CoC Must Be Paid by Corporate Debtor.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: CHENNAI In Favour of Accused
  • 54
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involves an appeal filed by the Chief Manager of Canara Bank, the sole Financial Creditor of M/s S.V.K. Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. (Corporate Debtor), against an order of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) that directed the payment of professional fees to the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP), Respondent No.1. The IRP had filed an application before the NCLT seeking payment of his fees, which was allowed. The Financial Creditor appealed, arguing that the IRP was not entitled to the fee as claimed. The NCLAT noted that the IRP had functioned as an IRP and the Committee of Creditors (CoC) had approved the resolution plan, which included the IRP's fee. The court held that the IRP is entitled to receive his professional fee as per the resolution passed by the CoC, and the Financial Creditor cannot challenge the same after the CoC's approval. The appeal was dismissed, and the NCLT's order was upheld. The court also closed the pending interlocutory application for urgent listing as the appeal was heard on merits.

Headnote

A) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code - Resolution Professional's Fee - Section 23, IBC, 2016 - The IRP is entitled to receive professional fee as approved by the CoC. The Financial Creditor cannot object to the payment of such fee after the CoC has approved the resolution plan. The appeal by the Financial Creditor challenging the fee is dismissed. (Paras 2-5)

B) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code - Committee of Creditors - Binding Nature of Decisions - Section 21, IBC, 2016 - The decision of the CoC regarding the fee of the IRP is binding on all creditors, including the Financial Creditor. The Financial Creditor cannot unilaterally challenge the fee after participating in the CoC meetings. (Paras 3-5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Financial Creditor can challenge the payment of professional fee to the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) after the Committee of Creditors (CoC) has approved the resolution plan and the fee.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal is dismissed. The NCLT order directing payment of professional fee to the IRP is upheld. IA No.580/2025 is closed.

Law Points

  • Insolvency Resolution Professional's fee approved by Committee of Creditors is binding on the corporate debtor
  • Financial Creditor cannot challenge the fee after approval
  • Section 23 of IBC
  • 2016
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2024 LawText (NCLAT) (01) 12

Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 165/2023

0000-00-00

Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma (Member (Judicial))

Mr. M.L. Ganesh (for Appellant), Mr. Sriram Venkatavaradan (for Respondent No.1)

The Chief Manager, Canara Bank (Sole Financial Creditor)

Mr. Kantipudi Venkata Raju (Erstwhile Interim Resolution Professional of S.V.K. Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd.) and Mr. Kalvakolanu Murali Krishna Prasad (Resolution Professional of S.V.K. Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd.)

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against NCLT order directing payment of professional fee to IRP

Remedy Sought

Appellant (Financial Creditor) sought to set aside the NCLT order directing payment of IRP fee

Filing Reason

Financial Creditor challenged the entitlement of IRP to professional fee as approved by CoC

Previous Decisions

NCLT allowed the IRP's application for payment of professional fee

Issues

Whether the Financial Creditor can challenge the IRP's fee after CoC approval? Whether the IRP is entitled to professional fee as per CoC resolution?

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the IRP is not entitled to the fee as claimed. Respondent No.1 contended that he functioned as IRP and is entitled to fee as per CoC resolution.

Ratio Decidendi

The IRP is entitled to receive professional fee as approved by the Committee of Creditors. The Financial Creditor cannot challenge the fee after the CoC has approved the resolution plan.

Judgment Excerpts

The Respondent No.1 contends that he had functioned as a IRP and therefore he is entitled to get his professional fee as per the resolution, which has been passed by the Committee of Creditors and that denial of the same would be unethical and contrary to provisions of law. The IRP is entitled to receive his professional fee as per the resolution passed by the CoC.

Procedural History

The IRP filed IA(IBC)/347/2022 before NCLT seeking payment of professional fee. NCLT allowed the application. The Financial Creditor appealed to NCLAT. The appeal was heard and dismissed.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: Section 23
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Tribunals NCLAT Dismisses Appeal by Financial Creditor Against IRP Fee Claim in Insolvency Case — Professional Fee of IRP Approved by CoC Must Be Paid by Corporate Debtor.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Second Appeal in Land Encroachment Case — Measurement Map Not Proved as Per Law. Court holds that mere production of measurement map without examining the surveyor or proving its preparation in accordance with the Maharasht...