This case involves an application filed under Section 22(3) read with Section 60(5)(c) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking directions for the continuation of one of the two Interim Resolution Professionals (IRPs). The issue arose because a petition against the corporate debtor, NSP Hospitech India Private Limited, was admitted on 04.12.2018 by the Second Bench under Section 9 of the IBC. Subsequently, on 12.12.2018, the Principal Bench also admitted a petition against the same corporate debtor filed by L & T Finance Limited under Section 7 of the IBC. The court notes that the second admission could have been avoided if the earlier admission had been brought to their attention.
On 04.12.2018, a petition against NSP Hospitech India Private Limited was admitted by the Second Bench of the NCLT under Section 9 of the IBC. Subsequently, on 12.12.2018, the Principal Bench also admitted a petition against the same corporate debtor, NSP Hospitech India Private Limited, filed by L & T Finance Limited under Section 7 of the IBC. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Grover was appointed as the IRP in the earlier proceeding and had already taken over the affairs of the company. The application before the court seeks directions for the continuation of one of the two IRPs, highlighting the procedural irregularity of admitting two separate petitions against the same corporate debtor.
Sign in to view the parties.
A petition against NSP Hospitech India Private…
A petition against the same corporate debtor,…
This case involves an application filed under Section 22(3) read with Section 60(5)(c) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking directions for the continuation of one of the two Interim Resolution Professionals (IRPs). The issue arose because a petition against the corporate debtor, NSP Hospitech India Private Limited, was admitted on 04.12.2018 by the Second Bench under Section 9 of the IBC. Subsequently, on 12.12.2018, the Principal Bench also admitted a petition against the same corporate debtor filed by L & T Finance Limited under Section 7 of the IBC. The court notes that the second admission could have been avoided if the earlier admission had been brought to their attention.
On 04.12.2018, a petition against NSP Hospitech India Private Limited was admitted by the Second Bench of the NCLT under Section 9 of the IBC. Subsequently, on 12.12.2018, the Principal Bench also admitted a petition against the same corporate debtor, NSP Hospitech India Private Limited, filed by L & T Finance Limited under Section 7 of the IBC. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Grover was appointed as the IRP in the earlier proceeding and had already taken over the affairs of the company. The application before the court seeks directions for the continuation of one of the two IRPs, highlighting the procedural irregularity of admitting two separate petitions against the same corporate debtor.
A petition against NSP Hospitech India Private…
A petition against the same corporate debtor,…