The case involves a Company Appeal concerning the replacement of the Resolution Professional (RP) of MQ Networks Private Limited, a Corporate Debtor under the CIRP process. The Financial Creditor sought the RP's replacement due to alleged non-cooperative behavior. The NCLT directed the RP's replacement, which is challenged in this appeal.
MQ Networks Private Limited is the Corporate Debtor under CIRP.
Mathioli N was appointed as the Resolution Professional for MQ Networks Private Limited.
The Financial Creditor, Reliance Asset Reconstruction Company Limited, sought the replacement of Mathioli N as RP.
The NCLT, Chennai Bench, ordered the replacement of Mathioli N as RP.
Mathioli N, as the Appellant, challenges the NCLT's order, arguing non-compliance with Section 27 of the I&B Code.
The Appellant claims that the agenda for his replacement was not properly placed before the CoC.
The Respondent alleges that the Appellant deliberately avoided placing the agenda for his replacement before the CoC.
The Financial Creditor filed an application under Section 60(5) of the I&B Code seeking the RP's replacement.
…Sign in to view the parties.
Date of the impugned order passed by the NCLT,…
Date of the email communication from the…
The case involves a Company Appeal concerning the replacement of the Resolution Professional (RP) of MQ Networks Private Limited, a Corporate Debtor under the CIRP process. The Financial Creditor sought the RP's replacement due to alleged non-cooperative behavior. The NCLT directed the RP's replacement, which is challenged in this appeal.
MQ Networks Private Limited is the Corporate Debtor under CIRP.
Mathioli N was appointed as the Resolution Professional for MQ Networks Private Limited.
The Financial Creditor, Reliance Asset Reconstruction Company Limited, sought the replacement of Mathioli N as RP.
The NCLT, Chennai Bench, ordered the replacement of Mathioli N as RP.
Mathioli N, as the Appellant, challenges the NCLT's order, arguing non-compliance with Section 27 of the I&B Code.
The Appellant claims that the agenda for his replacement was not properly placed before the CoC.
The Respondent alleges that the Appellant deliberately avoided placing the agenda for his replacement before the CoC.
The Financial Creditor filed an application under Section 60(5) of the I&B Code seeking the RP's replacement.
…Date of the impugned order passed by the NCLT,…
Date of the email communication from the…