Panapathi G. Seeds Pvt. Ltd. a closely held private company was engaged in the business of processing oilseeds for edible oils. It was established in 1988 under the leadership of Panapathi G. Prasad. Within a decade, Pan

Panapathi G. Seeds Pvt. Ltd. a closely held private company was engaged in the business of processing oilseeds for edible oils. It was established in 1988 under the leadership of Panapathi G. Prasad. Within a decade, Panapathi G. Seeds Pvt. Ltd positioned itself as a leader in production of groundnut oil in the Western region of India with two premium brands. In 2016 Panapathi G. Prasad had a severe heart attack and died without any succession plan in place. Ram and Sham, the two sons of Panapathi G. Prasad were also directors in the company with equal shareholding. After the death of Panapathi G. Prasad, both brothers had strained relations over the management control which adversely affected the business of the company. With declining profit and turnover both the brothers were worried and decided to reach a family settlement whereby the control of the company was handed over to the elder brother Ram. Sham resigned as the director of the company and in lieu of the same he was entrusted with the management and control of another family firm Saraswathi Edibles, wherein both brothers were partners. Praveen, son of Ram was inducted as director in the Company. In 2018 Sham wanted to withdraw unsecured loan given by him to the company because the company stopped paying him interest on the loan. Despite follow up Sham was not paid either the principal or interest, which forced him to file an application under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016. The Adjudicating Authority (i) admitted the application, (ii) declared moratorium and (iii) appointed Nagarajan, as an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). Ram refused to hand over the management control to the IRP on the plea that it was a family dispute, and they will settle soon on their own. He also asked the IRP not to make the public announcement. IRP tried to persuade Ram citing the provisions of the Code and warned him that if he does not hand over control of the Corporate Debtor IRP will be forced to approach the Adjudicating Authority for appropriate orders. Thereafter Ram allowed the IRP to take inventory of the assets and stocks after 15 days from the insolvency commencement date. With reference to the above facts and other details provided, answer the following questions with particular reference to the provisions contained in the Code, Regulations and rules of IBC and others: IRP sent the notice of the CoC meeting to Ram but not to Sham. Sham protested this and represented that Ram is also a related party and an unsecured financial creditor like him therefore, he is also entitled to receive notice of the CoC meeting. What is your opinion on the representation by Sham ?