Timely submission of claims during the insolvency resolution process is essential; belated claims undermine the framework of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

COMMON ORDER

[PER K. R. SAJI KUMAR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

1. BACKGROUND

1.1 The captioned Interim Applications (I.A.s) have been filed by six ex-employees of ‘Indo Global Soft Solutions and Technologies Pvt. Ltd’, the Corporate Debtor (CD), against Mr. Ravi Sethia, the Resolution Professional (Respondent/RP) of the CD under Section 60 (5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Code), inter alia, seeking directions against the RP to consider, accept and admit their respective claims towards salary dues including PF; Professional Tax; unpaid TDS amount; and full and final settlement amount. Since all the Applicants are ex-employees of the CD and the Applications filed by them are for admission of their respective claims against the same Respondent in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) of the CD, these I.A.s are dealt with under this Common Order. The details of the Applicants and their respective claim amounts are tabulated below:

2. CONTENTIONS OF THE APPLICANTS

2.1 The Applicants submit that they were employees of the CD prior to the commencement of its CIRP on 12.04.2022. Mr. Shailen Shah was appointed as the resolution professional earlier.

2.2 The Applicants contend that the HR representative of the CD, Ms. Sonal Kalamkar, vide email dated 25.10.2023, forwarded Form E claims of the Applicants along with salary slips and supporting documents to the erstwhile RP. However, the erstwhile RP, by email dated 02.11.2023, stated that the claims could not be considered owing to the delayed submission.

2.3 The Applicants further state that Ms. Sonal Kalamkar had earlier addressed email dated 26.09.2023 to the Indian Institute of Insolvency Professionals of ICAI (IIIPI), raising grievances against the erstwhile RP, Mr. Shailen Shah. The IIIPI, vide its communication No. GRC/333/2023-24/98 dated 08.05.2024, informed the HR of the CD that their grievances were closed as no actionable material was found against the RP.

2.4 The HR of the CD addressed further emails dated 03.11.2023 and 06.11.2023 to the RP reiterating the grievances of the Applicants and alleging unfair treatment to the former employees of the CD, while requesting reconsideration of their claims, but the requests did not yield any result. Hence, the present Applications.

3. CONTENTIONS OF RP

3.1 The RP did not file formal replies to these I.A.s; however, he was represented through Sr. Counsel, who refuted all the allegations made by the Applicants. The Ld. Sr. Counsel for the RP contends that all these I.A.s are frivolous and motivated by the ex-promoters of the CD. The attempt of the ex-promoters is only to put hurdle in the CIRP of the CD, and to cause unnecessary delay in the approval of the Resolution Plan by this Adjudicating Authority, which has already been approved by the CoC. The Resolution Plan is finally heard and reserved for orders by this Adjudicating Authority on 25.08.2025. He further submitted that there has been considerable delay in the process due to multiple reasons and urged that these I.A.s, have been filed only to deliberately obstruct the approval of the Plan by this Bench. In view of the above, he submits that these delayed claim Applications may be dismissed in limine.

4. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

4.1 We have heard the Ld. Sr. Counsel for the Respondent/RP and the Ld. Counsel for the Applicants, and perused the documents on record, as also considered their pleadings.

4.2 The CIRP of the CD commenced on 12.04.2022, and the public announcement under Regulation 6 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (In