# In the matter of Rajesh Gems and Jewels Pvt. Ltd. (Vinayak Advertising Vs. Rajesh Gems and Jewels Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.) (IB)-546-(ND)-2017

> NCLT judgment dated 2018-06-08. Citation: TCN-2018-NCLT-01309. The case involves Vinayak Advertising Vs. Rajesh Gems and Jewels Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. An…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 8 Jun 2018
- **Citation:** TCN-2018-NCLT-01309
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-chandigarh/rajesh-gems-and-jewels-pvt-ltd-vinayak-advertising-vs-rajesh-gems-and-jewels-pvt-c813eeae

## Summary

### Background

The case involves Vinayak Advertising Vs. Rajesh Gems and Jewels Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. An application was filed regarding the non-payment of remuneration to the previous Resolution Professional (RP). The Counsel for the Operational Creditor, being the biggest claimant in the Committee of Creditors (COC), requested a review of the order regarding the RP's remuneration. Another application was filed by the RP placing on record the request of the COC to go in for liquidation of the Corporate Debtor.

## Facts

The case involves a dispute over the remuneration of the previous Resolution Professional (RP) in the matter of Vinayak Advertising Vs. Rajesh Gems and Jewels Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. The Operational Creditor, being the largest claimant in the Committee of Creditors (COC), sought a review of the order concerning the RP's remuneration, arguing that the remuneration had not been paid despite specific directions. The COC had ratified and confirmed the RP's expenses. The RP filed another application based on the COC's request to liquidate the Corporate Debtor. The court noted the absence of a concrete liquidation proposal. The key facts are the non-payment of the RP's remuneration, the COC's ratification of expenses, and the COC's request for liquidation.

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the court should review its previous order regarding the remuneration of the Resolution …

**Ratio:** A court should only review its order if

…

**Reasoning:** The court found no cogent ground presented before it to review the order regarding the

…

**Interpretation:** This means that the court will not revisit a prior decision unless there is a

…

**Application:** Since no compelling reason was presented, the court declined to review its

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Deepa Kr…; Ina Mal…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Vinayak Advertisin…
- **Respondents:** Rajesh Gems and…

## Timeline

- **2018-06-08 — Hearing…**: Hearing before the New Delhi Bench of…
- **2018-06-11 — Further Consi…**: Case re-notified for…

---

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/nclt-chandigarh/rajesh-gems-and-jewels-pvt-ltd-vinayak-advertising-vs-rajesh-gems-and-jewels-pvt-c813eeae