This appeal was filed against the order dated 07.04.2025 passed by the Adjudicating Authority in IA No. 1582 of 2025. The appellant, an Erstwhile Resolution Professional, was replaced. The IBBI had passed an order on 30.07.2024 suspending the registration of the appellant. The appellant's counsel referred to paragraph 4.6 of the order, stating that the CoC could decide to continue the services of the Resolution Professional. The appellant argued that the CoC had not decided to discontinue the appellant's existing assignment, and the application was filed by someone who was not a member of the CoC without hearing the appellant.
Rakesh Kumar Gupta, the appellant, was an Erstwhile Resolution Professional for Three C Universal Developers Pvt. Ltd. The Respondent, IDBI Trusteeship Services Ltd. & Ors., filed an application (IA No. 1582 of 2025) before the Adjudicating Authority, which led to an order replacing the appellant. The IBBI had suspended the registration of the appellant on 30.07.2024. The appellant argued that the CoC, which should decide on the continuation of the Resolution Professional's services, was not involved in the application for replacement. The CoC was not made a party to the application filed by the Respondent. The Adjudicating Authority passed the order for replacement without hearing the CoC. The IBBI order copies were sent to all CoCs where the appellant was
…Sign in to view the parties.
IBBI passed an order…
Adjudicating Authority passed an order in IA…
This appeal was filed against the order dated 07.04.2025 passed by the Adjudicating Authority in IA No. 1582 of 2025. The appellant, an Erstwhile Resolution Professional, was replaced. The IBBI had passed an order on 30.07.2024 suspending the registration of the appellant. The appellant's counsel referred to paragraph 4.6 of the order, stating that the CoC could decide to continue the services of the Resolution Professional. The appellant argued that the CoC had not decided to discontinue the appellant's existing assignment, and the application was filed by someone who was not a member of the CoC without hearing the appellant.
Rakesh Kumar Gupta, the appellant, was an Erstwhile Resolution Professional for Three C Universal Developers Pvt. Ltd. The Respondent, IDBI Trusteeship Services Ltd. & Ors., filed an application (IA No. 1582 of 2025) before the Adjudicating Authority, which led to an order replacing the appellant. The IBBI had suspended the registration of the appellant on 30.07.2024. The appellant argued that the CoC, which should decide on the continuation of the Resolution Professional's services, was not involved in the application for replacement. The CoC was not made a party to the application filed by the Respondent. The Adjudicating Authority passed the order for replacement without hearing the CoC. The IBBI order copies were sent to all CoCs where the appellant was
…IBBI passed an order…
Adjudicating Authority passed an order in IA…