# In the matter of Shri Guru Containers vs. Jitendra Palande Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.106 of 2023

> NCLAT judgment dated 2023-02-22. Citation: TCN-2023-NCLAT-00705. This case involves an appeal against an order dated 07.12.2022 passed by the Adjudicating…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 22 Feb 2023
- **Citation:** TCN-2023-NCLAT-00705
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/shri-guru-containers-vs-jitendra-palande-company-appeal-1c3cf479

## Summary

### Background

This case involves an appeal against an order dated 07.12.2022 passed by the Adjudicating Authority, National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, directing Shri Guru Containers (the Appellant) to reimburse the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) a total cost of Rs. 5,62,000/-. The Section 9 petition was admitted against Tarang Exports Private Limited, the Corporate Debtor. The Operational Creditor/Appellant did not propose the name of the IRP, hence the Adjudicating Authority appointed the IRP. The IRP issued a public announcement on 11.03.2020. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic and subsequent lockdown, the Operational Creditor could not follow up on the progress of the CIRP until end-September 2020. The IRP filed an application under Section 19 of IBC for issue of

…

## Facts

Shri Guru Containers, the Appellant, filed an appeal against the Adjudicating Authority's order dated 07.12.2022, which directed them to reimburse Rs. 5,62,000/- to the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). A Section 9 petition was admitted against Tarang Exports Private Limited, the Corporate Debtor. The Appellant, being the Operational Creditor, did not propose an IRP, leading the Adjudicating Authority to appoint one. The IRP issued a public announcement on 11.03.2020. The Covid-19 pandemic hindered the Operational Creditor's follow-up on the CIRP. The IRP filed applications under Section 19 and Section 60 of the IBC, seeking information, reimbursement, and termination of the CIRP. The Appellant contended the IRP failed in his duties, while the IRP claimed he

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the IRP is entitled to claim fees and …

**Ratio:** Section 5(13) of the IBC defines 'Insolvency Resolution Process Costs' to include fees

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLAT considered that the IRP continued with his efforts to obtain information and

…

**Interpretation:** The legal issue revolves around interpreting the provisions of the IBC and

…

**Application:** The ratio and reasoning were applied to the specific facts of the case,

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Barun M…
- **Appellants:** Guru Cont…
- **Respondents:** Tarang Exports…; Jitendra P…
- **Advocates:** Shreya M…; Aswathi…; +4 more

## Timeline

- **2019-01-01 — CP (IB) No.36…**: Mention of CP (IB)…
- **2020-02-17 — Section 9 Petition…**: Section 9 petition was admitted against Tarang Exports Private Limited by the…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 61 — Appeals and Appellate Authority](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-61)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/shri-guru-containers-vs-jitendra-palande-company-appeal-1c3cf479