Case Note & Summary
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal dealt with three appeals filed by Indian Bank against orders of the National Company Law Tribunal regarding the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) of Nimitaya Hotel & Resorts Ltd. The appeals were against orders dated 07.07.2026, 16.07.2026, and 14.08.2026. The appellant sought condonation of delays in filing the appeals, which was granted. The core issue revolved around the replacement of the Resolution Professional and whether notice was required to be given to the Resolution Professional as per Section 27 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). The Tribunal noted that the Committee of Creditors (CoC) has the authority to replace the Resolution Professional without needing to provide reasons, and the Adjudicating Authority's insistence on notice was contrary to the provisions of the IBC. The Tribunal also addressed the conduct of the senior officer of the bank and expunged remarks made against him in the impugned orders. The appeals were disposed of with directions for the Adjudicating Authority to consider the application for the new Resolution Professional first, followed by the other pending applications. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of adhering to the statutory provisions and the powers vested in the CoC under the IBC.
Headnote
A) Insolvency Law - Replacement of Resolution Professional - Authority of Committee of Creditors - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 27 - The Tribunal held that the Committee of Creditors has the authority to replace the Resolution Professional without needing to provide reasons to the Adjudicating Authority, as per the provisions of Section 27 of the IBC. The Adjudicating Authority's requirement for notice was deemed unnecessary and contrary to the statutory provisions (Paras 18-20). B) Insolvency Law - Condonation of Delay - Timeliness of Appeals - Not applicable - The Tribunal condoned the delays in filing the appeals based on the grounds presented in the applications, allowing the appeals to proceed (Paras 1-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Adjudicating Authority erred in requiring notice to the Resolution Professional for replacement and whether the delay in filing appeals should be condoned.
Final Decision
The Tribunal condoned the delays in filing the appeals and held that the Committee of Creditors has the authority to replace the Resolution Professional without needing to provide reasons. The impugned orders were modified to allow the application for the new Resolution Professional to be considered first, followed by other pending applications.
Law Points
- Insolvency and Bankruptcy
- Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process
- Replacement of Resolution Professional
- Condonation of Delay
