The court held that payment timelines in liquidation processes are mandatory and cannot be extended without exceptional circumstances.

ORDER

Per Coram

1. The present application has been filed by CA Jasin Jose, the Liquidator of M/s AP Steel Re-Rolling Mill Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the ’Corporate Debtor’) under Section 60 (5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as ’the Code’), with the following prayer:

a. This Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to grant additional time until 31/07/2025 to the successful bidder to make the balance sale consideration.

b. For such other and further directions as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

2. The Applicant submitted that this Tribunal vide order dated 19.11.2024 in IA(IBC)(Liq.)/07/KOB/2024 in CP(IBC)/17/KOB/2024, allowed the liquidation application under Section 33 (2) of the Code, filed by the Resolution Professional Mr. Jossy Steephen Kattur. Subsequently, vide order dated 27.11.2024 in IA(IBC)/500/KOB/2024, the Applicant was appointed as the Liquidator of the Corporate Debtor, and the said order was received by him on 05.12.2024.

3. The Applicant stated that, in compliance with the order, a public announcement in Form B was issued on 10.12.2024. It is further stated that he has received claims in response to the public announcement, which are currently under verification.

4. It is submitted by the Applicant that the Liquidator, along with the erstwhile Resolution Professional, visited the factory premises and took possession of documents, records, and assets. The factory was found to be in a deteriorated condition with damaged rooftops and no machinery on- site. meeting on 19.12.2024 discussed the existing Corporate Insolvency Subsequently, the first Stakeholders’ Consultation Committee Resolution Process valuation, deferring fresh valuation pending review. The Liquidator shared the valuation report with Federal Bank after a Non- Disclosure Agreement was signed and updated the Stakeholders’

5. ICto niss uslttaatteiodn tChoamt mini tttheee on the company’s condition meeting on 10.02.2025, the Federal Bank proposed appointing the lowest- second Stakeholders’ Consultation Committee quoted forensic auditor, with no objections. The Committee of Creditors consider additional remuneration if assets are tied up in litigation. The fixed the Liquidator’s fees as per Regulation 4(2)(b) and agreed to Resolution Process valuation and agreed to sell dismantled machinery as Stakeholders’ Consultation Committee adopted the Corporate Insolvency scrap, with valuation details to be shared soon. The Applicant clarified asset discrepancies raised by the Income Tax Department, noting many assets were sold earlier, and verification is pending audit.

6. It is submitted by the Applicant that the third Committee meeting on 18.02.2025 unanimously appointed Mr. Shawn Jeff Stakeholders’ Consultation Christopher as Forensic Auditor. The Committee , Plant & Stakeholders’ Consultation Machinery, and Land & Building, separately. The Applicant pointed out meeting decided to sell the company’s assets that Plant & Machinery would be sold as scrap per the current valuation, but a new valuation might be needed for temporary structures. The Federal Bank recommended proceeding with the sale using the highest fair value from existing valuers. The Committee agreed to initiate an e-auction bas