In the third meeting of Committee of Creditors of ABC Company Ltd, the Interim Resolution Professional was replaced by another person as the Resolution Professional. The appellant wants to file an application before the

In the case of Punjab National Bank Vs. Mr. Kirah Shah, Interim Resolution Professional of ORG Informatics Ltd. [CA (AT) (Ins) No. 749/2019]-NCLAT held that the Committee of Creditors is not required to record any reason for replacing the RP that may otherwise call for proceedings against such Resolution Professional. Having decided to remove the Resolution Professional with 88 percent of the voting share, the decision of Committee of Creditors was not open to the AA interfering with such decision, till it is shown that the decision of the Committee of Creditors is perverse or without jurisdiction. Further in case of Bank of India vs. M/s Nithin Nutrition Pvt. Ltd. [Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 497 of 2020 (with connected appeals)]-NCLAT observed that neither section 22 nor section 27 of the IBC requires the Committee of Creditors to give any reasons. The reason is that the relationship between the RP and the Committee of Creditors is that of confidence. If there is loss of confidence and the RP continues in the role, the corporate debtor would be put to loss because of the bad relationship between the Interim Resolution Professional/RP and the Committee of Creditors NCLAT held that the Committee of Creditors has the requisite powers to propose changing the Interim Resolution Professional even in meeting/s subsequent to the first one and there is no requirement that they should give particular reasons for the change Therefore, appointment of RP is valid/proper and Adjudicating Authority cannot reject the application.