If after repeated negotiations, a Resolution Plan is submitted and has been approved by CoC with a majority vote, such commercial wisdom is not required to be called into question or casually interfered with – Ramkrishna Forgings Ltd. Vs. Ravindra Loonkar, RP of ACIL Ltd. & Anr. – Supreme Court
Hon’ble Supreme Court held that Supreme Court of India:
(i) The CoC is the decision-maker and in the driver’s seat, so to say, of the Corporate Debtor.
(ii) if the CoC had undertaken repeated negotiations with the Resolution Applicant with regard to the Resolution Plan and thereafter, with a majority of votes, approved the final negotiated Resolution Plan, unless the same was failing the tests of the provisions of the Code, especially Sections 30 & 31, no interference was warranted.
(iii) It is for the Financial Creditors who constitute the CoC to take a call, one way or the other. Stricto sensu, it is now well-settled that it is well within the CoC’s domain as to how to deal with the entire debt of the Corporate Debtor.
(iv) The Adjudicating Authority has jurisdiction only under Section 31(2) of the Code, which gives power not to approve only when the Resolution Plan does not meet the requirement laid down under Section 31(1) of the Code, for which a reasoned order is required to be passed.
(v) NCLT’s jurisdiction and powers as the Adjudicating Authority under the Code, flow only from the Code and the Regulations thereunder.
(vi) Recording of reasons, and not just reasons but cogent reasons, for orders is a duty on Courts and Tribunals.
(vii) There was no occasion before the Adjudicating Authority-NCLT to be swayed only on the per se ground that the hair-cut would be about 94.25%.
