Operational creditors of Binani Cement on Thursday alleged before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) that the resolution professional (RP) kept them out of the resolution process and their claims were never verified. The counsel for operational creditors also alleged that there had been a great deal of misconduct by the RP.
The two-member NCLAT bench, led by its chairperson justice SJ Mukhopadhaya, said in that event, the lenders should have referred the matter to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI). The bench also asked the operational creditors’ lawyer to submit their grievances before it in writing.
The two-member bench, which is hearing cross petitions filed by Binani Cement’s suitors — UltraTech Cement and Rajputana Properties — will next hear the case of August 24. Section 30 (2) (B) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) makes it mandatory for the resolution applicant to provide for the payment of the debts of operational creditors in the resolution plan.
On July 2, the Supreme Court had asked the appellate tribunal to decide all issues related to the Binani Cement insolvency case, including the eligibility criteria of UltraTech Cement to file a revised bid.
Rajuptana Properties had alleged that UltraTech Cement was ineligible to submit a resolution plan for Binani Cement under Section 29A of the IBC and its eligibility should be decided first. On May 4, the NCLAT in an interim order had allowed the resolution professional and the committee of creditors to consider the revised resolution plan submitted by UltraTech.
It also offered Rajputana Properties an opportunity to revise its resolution plan of `6,930 crore, which includes infusion of working capital and capex.
The Kolkata Bench of the NCLT had admitted the insolvency petition against Binani Cement On July 25, 2017. Bank of Baroda had referred the company to the bankruptcy court.