The case involves an application filed by Radhasiriya Properties Pvt Ltd against Jai Narayan Gupta, the Liquidator of Barcle Enterprises Limited, seeking a refund of Rs. 23,88,280. The Tribunal had previously initiated CIRP for Barcle Enterprises Limited and appointed Jai Narayan Gupta as the IRP, later as the liquidator after no resolution plan was received. Radhasiriya Properties proposed a scheme of compromise and arrangement, depositing Rs. 7,88,280. Communications ensued, and the liquidator accepted the scheme and filed an application to conduct a creditors' meeting. The applicant was asked to deposit half of the scheme amount, which they did. The liquidator demanded further payments, threatening to withdraw the application if not made. The applicant requested the
…Barcle Enterprises Limited underwent CIRP, with Jai Narayan Gupta initially appointed as IRP and later as liquidator. Radhasiriya Properties Pvt Ltd proposed a compromise scheme and deposited Rs. 7,88,280. The liquidator accepted the scheme and filed an application for a creditors' meeting. The applicant was asked to deposit half of the scheme amount. The liquidator demanded further payments, threatening withdrawal if payments weren't made. A creditors' meeting was held, and the scheme was rejected by 95.58% of the creditors. The applicant sought a refund of Rs. 23,88,280, which the liquidator refused, claiming it as liquidation cost. The liquidator claimed that the costs incurred during the period of compromise or arrangement were legitimate liquidation costs. The
…Sign in to view the parties.
The Tribunal directed…
The Tribunal passed an…
The case involves an application filed by Radhasiriya Properties Pvt Ltd against Jai Narayan Gupta, the Liquidator of Barcle Enterprises Limited, seeking a refund of Rs. 23,88,280. The Tribunal had previously initiated CIRP for Barcle Enterprises Limited and appointed Jai Narayan Gupta as the IRP, later as the liquidator after no resolution plan was received. Radhasiriya Properties proposed a scheme of compromise and arrangement, depositing Rs. 7,88,280. Communications ensued, and the liquidator accepted the scheme and filed an application to conduct a creditors' meeting. The applicant was asked to deposit half of the scheme amount, which they did. The liquidator demanded further payments, threatening to withdraw the application if not made. The applicant requested the
…Barcle Enterprises Limited underwent CIRP, with Jai Narayan Gupta initially appointed as IRP and later as liquidator. Radhasiriya Properties Pvt Ltd proposed a compromise scheme and deposited Rs. 7,88,280. The liquidator accepted the scheme and filed an application for a creditors' meeting. The applicant was asked to deposit half of the scheme amount. The liquidator demanded further payments, threatening withdrawal if payments weren't made. A creditors' meeting was held, and the scheme was rejected by 95.58% of the creditors. The applicant sought a refund of Rs. 23,88,280, which the liquidator refused, claiming it as liquidation cost. The liquidator claimed that the costs incurred during the period of compromise or arrangement were legitimate liquidation costs. The
…The Tribunal directed…
The Tribunal passed an…