UV Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. and Anr. v. Aircel Ltd.

Can a New Resolution Applicant be brought in or substituted with another Resolution Applicant, after approval of a Resolution Plan u/s 31 of IBC? – UV Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Aircel Ltd. – Supreme Court

A 3-Judge Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court has upheld the decision of NCLAT where NCLAT fully agreed with the reasons given by the Adjudicating Authority for rejecting the application filed by the Appellant for substituting another Resolution Applicant in place of the Appellant. When plan of the Appellant as Resolution Applicant was approved, the Adjudicating Authority rightly refused to substitute another Resolution Applicant, in which order no infirmity is found

Can a New Resolution Applicant be brought in or substituted with another Resolution Applicant, after approval of a Resolution Plan u/s 31 of IBC? – UV Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Aircel Ltd. – Supreme Court Read Post »

Once a Resolution Plan approved u/s 31 of IBC, New Resolution Applicant cannot be brought in nor can be substituted with another Resolution Applicant – UV Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Aircel Ltd. Through Its Monitoring Committee – NCLAT New Delhi

In this case, ARC was Resolution Applicant. In view of the circular issued by RBI, ARCs cannot be Resolution Applicant unless they have achieved certain net worth which the present Appellant has not. ARC filed an application praying for substitution of Resolution Applicant with another entity, which has been rejected by the NCLT by the impugned order.

NCLAT upheld the decision of NCLT.

Once a Resolution Plan approved u/s 31 of IBC, New Resolution Applicant cannot be brought in nor can be substituted with another Resolution Applicant – UV Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Aircel Ltd. Through Its Monitoring Committee – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

Scroll to Top