The disciplinary committee of insolvency and bankruptcy board of India (IBBI) has reprimanded insolvency professional (IP) for non-verification and checking of appointment communication mail by AA.
An application was filed before The National Company Law Tribunal, Chennai Bench (AA) by Trane Asian Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. (Operational Creditor/ OC) under section 9 of the Code for initiation of CIRP of CD. The AA passed an order for initiation of the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) against the Sandhya Shipping Services Private Limited (CD) and appointed Maheswaran as an IRP.
In the said order, OC and Registry were directed by AA to send a copy of the order to Maheswaran through e-mail. It is further noted that Mr. Maheswaran had filed an application for extension of CIRP and exclusion of a period of 275 days before AA stating that the above stated order was not communicated to him by the OC. Maheswaran further submitted that the e-mail sent by the Registry of AA had got itself lodged in the “SPAM Folder of Mailbox” in his e-mail and in the circumstances effectively he was not aware of his appointment and hence the CIRP period of “275 Days” was required to be excluded from the CIRP of the CD. However, AA rejected this argument.
Maheswaran submitted that the mail sent by the Registry was received in his Spam folder and as a result he was unaware that he had been appointed as an IRP in this matter. He also submitted that the moment he came to know that such a mail had gone unnoticed, he filed an interim application praying for exclusion of days and extension of CIRP.
He further submitted that, previously he had no previous experience of being appointed as an RP and had no dishonest or malicious reason for omission.
The disciplinary committee headed by Jayanti Prasad (Whole Time Member, IBBI) observed that,
“Maheswaran cannot take the plea that since e-mail sent by the registry of AA landed in his spam folder of email and he did not get intimation about his appointment as IRP by AA. It is a reasonable professional expectation from an IP to be more vigilant, cautious and alert in discharge of his duties and verify and check the communications sent to him. Thus, the submission of Mr. Maheshwaran, that the email had got itself lodged in the spam folder, does not hold good. The matter is settled between the parties and the AA has allowed the application for withdrawal.”
The committee disposed of the SCN cautioning Rajagurusami Maheswaran to be more careful in future and directed him to strictly comply with the applicable provisions of the Code and its underlying Regulations while performing his duties.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to TaxscanAdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
