The case involves an objection raised by the Respondent regarding the proposed Interim Resolution Professional (IRP), Mr. Shailesh Verma. Mr. Verma is an ex-employee of the State Bank of India (SBI), having worked there from 1977 until his retirement in 2016. The Respondent argues that this prior employment with SBI creates an apprehension of bias in favor of the Financial Creditor.
The State Bank of India (SBI), as the Financial Creditor, filed a case under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, against M/s. Metenere Limited, the Corporate Debtor. The Respondent raised an objection to the appointment of Mr. Shailesh Verma as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). Mr. Verma is a former employee of SBI, having worked there for over 39 years, from 1977 until his retirement in 2016. The Respondent argued that Mr. Verma's prior employment with SBI would create an apprehension of bias, preventing him from acting fairly and independently. The Petitioner, SBI, did not dispute the fact that Mr. Verma was an ex-employee. The court found merit in the Respondent's objection, concluding that Mr. Verma's prior employment made it unlikely
…Sign in to view the parties.
Mr. Shailesh Verma…
Mr. Shailesh Verma…
The case involves an objection raised by the Respondent regarding the proposed Interim Resolution Professional (IRP), Mr. Shailesh Verma. Mr. Verma is an ex-employee of the State Bank of India (SBI), having worked there from 1977 until his retirement in 2016. The Respondent argues that this prior employment with SBI creates an apprehension of bias in favor of the Financial Creditor.
The State Bank of India (SBI), as the Financial Creditor, filed a case under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, against M/s. Metenere Limited, the Corporate Debtor. The Respondent raised an objection to the appointment of Mr. Shailesh Verma as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). Mr. Verma is a former employee of SBI, having worked there for over 39 years, from 1977 until his retirement in 2016. The Respondent argued that Mr. Verma's prior employment with SBI would create an apprehension of bias, preventing him from acting fairly and independently. The Petitioner, SBI, did not dispute the fact that Mr. Verma was an ex-employee. The court found merit in the Respondent's objection, concluding that Mr. Verma's prior employment made it unlikely
…Mr. Shailesh Verma…
Mr. Shailesh Verma…