Unsuccessful Resolution Applicant

Whether, after approval of Resolution Plan and issuance of LoI, an Unsuccessful Resolution Applicant can question the conduct of the Committee of Creditors(CoC) and challenge Resolution Plan of Successful Resolution Applicant(SRA) – Dhansagar Dealers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mr. Anubrata Gangoly, RP of Carnation Industries Ltd. – NCLT Kolkata Bench

In this important judgment, while approving resolution plan in the matter of Carnation Industries Ltd., Bench of Kolkata NCLT comprising of Ms. Bidisha Banerjee and Shri Arvind Devanathan, has held that:

(i) Any modifications or revisions of any plan after the approval of the plan by the CoC, even if undertaken as per directions of the CoC, shall not be entertained unless the CoC grants the subsequent approval.
(ii) An unsuccessful resolution applicant has no vested right to challenge the approval of a resolution plan.
(iii) The approval of Resolution Plan falls within the arena of “commercial wisdom” which cannot be questioned unless there is a violation of law as enshrined under Sections 30(2) and 31 of the I&B Code.
(iv) Once a resolution applicant fails to succeed in the bid, it neither has a locus to question the action of the stakeholders qua members sitting in and controlling the CoC, nor the right to enhance or revise the monetary value of its Resolution Plan to compete with the plan of the Successful Resolution Applicant.

Whether, after approval of Resolution Plan and issuance of LoI, an Unsuccessful Resolution Applicant can question the conduct of the Committee of Creditors(CoC) and challenge Resolution Plan of Successful Resolution Applicant(SRA) – Dhansagar Dealers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mr. Anubrata Gangoly, RP of Carnation Industries Ltd. – NCLT Kolkata Bench Read Post »

Whether Unsuccessful Resolution Applicant have vested right to challenge eligibility of Successful Resolution Applicant – Creative Channel Advertising & Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mr. Rohit Ramesh Mehra and Ors. – NCLT Mumbai Bench

The Hon’ble NCLT with respect to the IAs filed by PRA considered that since the plan already stands approved by the CoC in its commercial wisdom, these belated contentions are filed after filing of the Application for the approval of the Resolution Plan by RP. Moreover, this process under the IBC is a time bound process wherein the legislature and the regulator have set out specific timelines within which the process should be completed, including timelines within which PRAs can raise objections with respect to inclusion or exclusion of a PRA in the provisional list of PRAs basis the eligibility criteria. Therefore, the contentions raised thereafter are highly belated and now cannot be used to turn around and derail the process. Hence, relying on the above the applications are not maintainable as the unsuccessful resolution applicants have no vested right.

Whether Unsuccessful Resolution Applicant have vested right to challenge eligibility of Successful Resolution Applicant – Creative Channel Advertising & Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mr. Rohit Ramesh Mehra and Ors. – NCLT Mumbai Bench Read Post »

Abhijit Realtor & Infraventures Pvt. Ltd. and Entertainment Network (India) Ltd. Vs. Mr. Rohit Mehra RP of Reliance Broadcast Networks Ltd. and Anr. – NCLT Mumbai Bench

Login with GoogleOR Username Password Remember Me     Forgot Password In case you’ve already logged in, click here

Abhijit Realtor & Infraventures Pvt. Ltd. and Entertainment Network (India) Ltd. Vs. Mr. Rohit Mehra RP of Reliance Broadcast Networks Ltd. and Anr. – NCLT Mumbai Bench Read Post »

No Resolution Applicant has any vested right to have its Resolution Plan approved – Kanoria Energy & Infrastrcuture Ltd. Vs. Mr. Avishek Gupta, Erstwhile RP Sarga Hotel Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. – NCLAT New Delhi

Hon’ble NCLAT held that Commercial wisdom of the CoC has paramount important and CoC did consider the resolution plan submitted by the Appellant dated 11th April, 2023 and all the resolution plans were voted. It is well settled that no resolution applicant has any vested right to have its plan approved.

No Resolution Applicant has any vested right to have its Resolution Plan approved – Kanoria Energy & Infrastrcuture Ltd. Vs. Mr. Avishek Gupta, Erstwhile RP Sarga Hotel Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

When Resolution Plan of a Resolution Applicant has not been approved and there is no other Resolution Plan in the CIRP, no infirmity can be found in the order of the Adjudicating Authority directing for liquidation – Kamlesh Mehta Vs. Mirage Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. – NCLAT New Delhi

Hon’ble NCLAT held that:
(i) When order dated 15.06.2023 was not available on the said date and the order was uploaded on 31.07.2023, hence, appeal filed on 24.08.2023 cannot be said to be barred by time.
(ii) Appellant has submitted a Resolution Plan which plan was not approved by the CoC by requisite majority since other member of the CoC opposed the Resolution Plan.
(iii) When the Resolution Plan of the Appellant has not been approved and there is no other Resolution Plan in the CIRP, we are of the view that no infirmity can be found in the order of the Adjudicating Authority directing for liquidation.
(iv) The Appellant who was eligible to submit plan is also eligible to submit its Expression of Interest in the Liquidation Proceeding when notice is issued for selling the Corporate Debtor as a going concern.

When Resolution Plan of a Resolution Applicant has not been approved and there is no other Resolution Plan in the CIRP, no infirmity can be found in the order of the Adjudicating Authority directing for liquidation – Kamlesh Mehta Vs. Mirage Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

Once the majority of CoC decide on one of Resolution Plan, the decision of the CoC attains finality, Unsuccessful Resolution Applicant has no locus to challenge the commercial decision of the CoC – G. S. Constructions Vs. Mr. Gajesh Labhchand Jain – NCLT Mumbai Bench

NCLT Mumbai Bench held that:
(i) Once the majority of CoC decide on one of the Resolution Plan, the decision of the CoC attains finality.
(ii) Since the CoC comprising of SIDBI and the home buyers approved the Resolution Plan presented by Mrs. Asha Sanap, the Unsuccessful Resolution Applicant has no locus to challenge the commercial decision of the CoC.
(iii) The Applicant who himself was Prospective Resolution Applicant had submitted its Resolution Plan. At no stage, the Applicant challenged the constitution of the CoC. The Applicant is seeking relief to set aside and quash the CoC only after his plan not approved with the requisite voting of the CoC.

Once the majority of CoC decide on one of Resolution Plan, the decision of the CoC attains finality, Unsuccessful Resolution Applicant has no locus to challenge the commercial decision of the CoC – G. S. Constructions Vs. Mr. Gajesh Labhchand Jain – NCLT Mumbai Bench Read Post »

Scroll to Top