Tribunal Enforces Fee Cap and Orders Partial Allowance for Unsubstantiated Expenses
In a significant ruling, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Bengaluru bench has settled a contentious dispute regarding the fees and expenses claimed by the Monitoring Committee in the corporate insolvency resolution process of Trell Experiences Private Limited. The Tribunal, presided by Mr. Sunil Kumar Aggarwal and Mr. Radhakrishna Sreepada, issued an order on June 22, 2026, enforcing the stipulated fee cap and partially allowing expenses claimed by the Monitoring Committee.
The case involved Mr. Padmanabhan Nair, the erstwhile Resolution Professional and Chairman of the Monitoring Committee, seeking approval for Rs. 6,97,400 in Monitoring Committee costs, which included fees and other expenses related to the implementation of the Resolution Plan for Trell Experiences. The Respondent, Mr. Pulkit Agarwal, the Successful Resolution Applicant, disputed these claims, arguing that they were unsupported by documentary evidence and exceeded the fee cap established in the approved Resolution Plan.
The Tribunal found that while the Monitoring Committee was constituted following the approval order dated October 14, 2025, the fee arrangement was never validly approved beyond the stipulated cap of Rs. 50,000 per member per month. The Tribunal emphasized that the Monitoring Committee's authority and fee entitlement are strictly bound by the terms of the Resolution Plan, as per Section 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
Referencing judgments by the Supreme Court, including Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons Pvt. Ltd. v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. and Sanjay Dave v. Andhra Bank Ltd., the Tribunal reinforced the principle that once a Resolution Plan is approved, it binds all stakeholders without room for modification or deviation.
The Tribunal allowed only 2/3rd of the claimed amounts for specific expenses such as legal costs, accounting charges, and ROC compliance expenses, due to the lack of substantiated documentary evidence. It directed Mr. Nair to compute the outstanding monitoring costs based on these parameters and realize the same from the CIRP account, with the balance to be transferred to the Respondent before closing the account.
Furthermore, the Monitoring Committee was dissolved effective immediately, and Mr. Nair was instructed to file a compliance report within 30 days.
This judgment underscores the importance of adhering to the terms of an approved Resolution Plan and highlights the necessity for substantiating claims with proper documentation in insolvency proceedings.
Bottom line:-
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Monitoring Committee's authority and fee entitlement are bound by the terms of the approved Resolution Plan and cannot be unilaterally modified. Claims for additional costs and expenses must be substantiated with cogent documentary evidence.
Statutory provision(s): Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 Section 31
Padmanabhan Nair v. Pulkit Agarwal, (NCLT)(Bengaluru) : Law Finder Doc id # 2934572
