NCLT Rightly Invokes Inherent Jurisdiction to Replace RP for Failure to Adhere to Timelines and to Convene CoC Meeting: NCLAT

  • Blog|News|Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code|
  • 2 Min Read
  • By Taxmann
  • |
  • Last Updated on 15 May, 2023

Replacement of Resolution Professional

Case details: Srigopal Choudary Resolution Professional of Shree Ram Urban Infrastructure Ltd. v. SREI Equipment Finance Ltd. - [2023] 149 411 (NCLAT- New Delhi)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

    • Rakesh Kumar, Judicial Member and Ms. Shreesha Merla, Technical Member 
    • Dr. U.K. Chaudhary, Sr. Adv., Mansumyer SinghJaitegan Singh Khurana and Manpreet Kaur, Advs. for the Appellant. 
    • Krishnendu Datta, Sr. Adv., Anirban BhattacharyaMs. P. VoraS. BuxySrikanthD. Sachdeva, Advs., P. Nagesh, Sr. Adv., Rajeshwar SinghApoorva AgrawalSarthakHemant Sharma, Adv., Abhijeet SinghAkash ChatterjeeShahanulla and Krishan Kumar, Advs. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (IRP) was initiated against the corporate debtor and the appellant was appointed as the Resolution Professional (RP) by the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT).

The Committee of Creditors (CoC) was constituted, and its first meeting was held after one and a half years from the date of initiating the CIRP. The Respondent, who is a financial creditor of the corporate debtor, requested the RP to fix the date for a subsequent meeting of the CoC as previous meetings had been cancelled.

Later, the respondent, along with other financial creditors, filed applications before the Adjudicating Authority alleging that the RP’s inaction had resulted in a breach of the mandatory timelines of the CIRP. Therefore, they sought directions for the removal of the RP and the appointment of a new RP to reconstitute the CoC.

The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) vide the impugned order, directed that appellant be removed as the RP and instructed the handover of all records/documents to the newly appointed RP.

Then, an appeal was made to the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) against the order passed by the NCLT.

The appellant argued that the impugned order was contrary to statutory provisions as the power to remove the RP was vested in the CoC and the NCLT was not authorized to issue an order for the removal of RP.


The NCLAT observed that the appellant, who was expected to convene the CoC meeting, was deliberately avoiding it with the agenda of removing the appellant as the RP.

The NCLAT held that Section 27 of the IBC contemplates that the replacement of RP can be done by the CoC alone, however, the ingredients of the said provision could not be met as RP was not convening the meeting of the CoC.

Therefore, the Adjudicating Authority, to avoid delay in the CIRP proceedings, rightly invoked its inherent jurisdiction and passed the impugned order for the replacement of the RP. Accordingly, the appeal was to be dismissed.

Case Review

    • SREI Equipment Finance Ltd. v. Shree Ram Urban Infrastructure Ltd. [2023] 149 410 (NCLT – Mum.) (para 18) affirmed [See Annex].
    • Veeral Controls (P.) Ltd. v. Regen Powertech (P.) Ltd. [2022] 141 490 (NCLAT – Chennai) (para 12) distinguished.

List of Cases Referred to

Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Everything on Tax and Corporate Laws of India

To subscribe to our weekly newsletter please log in/register on

Author: Taxmann

Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.

The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:

  • The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
  • All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
  • Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
  • Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
  • All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
  • The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
  • Font and size that's easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied