Mohd Sharief Tariq, Member - (1.) In relation to CA/231 /IB/2017 filed in CP/467/IB/2017, Counsel for RP along with the RP present. Counsel for Applicant present. Counsel for R3 present. Counsel for Financial Creditor present. The main prayer made in C.A. is to set aside the resolution dated 08.12.2017 and to extend the period of CIRP and the RP may be fajihar directed to prepare Information Memorandum. The counter has been filed on behalf of the RP. The gist of the counter is that the factory and machinery are lying on the land of the Promoters, which is not the part of the assets of the Corporate Debtor. The land stands security for the loan obtained from Bank. The RP submitted that if the Promoter/Director are willing to transfer the land to the Corporate Debtor, then any prospective prayer can approach with any resolution plan, otherwise no one is ready to take risk. RP further submitted that the extended period of CIRP is expiring today. It has also been submitted that the suspended Directors has no locus standi to file the C.A. which is not maintainable.
(2.) The reply has alsoJhfienJiled to CA/231/IB/2017 by. the Financial Creditor stating therein that the suspended.Directors have no right to file the Application. He further submitted that the Corporate Debtor has not cc-operated with the RP during the moratorium period, including the extension period of thirty days.
(3.) Counsel for the RP has also submitted that the CoC in its meeting dated 08.12.2017 has very, clearly brought out the circumstances, which reflect that there is no possibility of viable plan for revival of the Corporate Debtor. Keeping in view the submissions of the Counsels for the RP, the Financial Creditor and the resolution passed by the CoC on 08.12.2017, the CA/231/2017 stands rejected.;