Umesh Kumar Vs Narendra Kumar Sharma (NCLAT Delhi)
Summary: The appeal under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was filed by Umesh Kumar, an Operational Creditor, against the order dated 21.11.2023 passed by the NCLT, New Delhi Bench-II in IA No.3594/2022 in CP (IB) No.1397(PB)/2019. The NCLT had rejected the Appellant’s application seeking acceptance of claims which had been rejected by Narendra Kumar Sharma, Resolution Professional of Indirapuram Habitat Centre Pvt. Ltd. The NCLAT dismissed the appeal on 13.02.2024 and affirmed the impugned order.
The Appellant claimed that he had been engaged as a media management consultant under a Consultancy Agreement dated 01.06.2016 at a monthly retainership of Rs.10 lakhs. He stated that payments had been received from the Corporate Debtor from June 2016 to April 2018 and that, after commencement of insolvency proceedings, he submitted his claims to the RP along with documents and invoices. The claim ultimately sought admission of an amount of Rs.1.90 crore for the period from May 2018 to August 2020, along with interest.
The Appellant contended that the RP had exceeded his authority by requiring proof of services, arguing that the RP’s role was limited to receiving, collating and verifying claims and that the RP did not possess adjudicatory powers. Reliance was placed on Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors., in which the Supreme Court recognised the non-adjudicatory role of the Resolution Professional. ([TaxGuru][1])
