A person who expressed its interest to submit a Resolution Plan & No financial proposal was provided cannot claim to be aggrieved of the order passed by Adjudicating Authority approving the Resolution Plan – Interups Inc Vs. Kuldeep Kumar Bassi (Resolution Professional of Asian Colour Coated Ispat Limited) – NCLAT New Delhi

NCLAT held that section 61(1) authorizes "any person aggrieved by the order of Adjudicating Authority under this part" can prefer an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. The `part' here refers to Part -II of the Code which comprises CIRP and Liquidation Process. Here what we observed that "any person aggrieved" comprises of stakeholders in the process of CIRP and Liquidation Process. The Appellant is stranger to the CIRP till 11th June, 2020. On 12.06.2020 the Appellant for the first time expressed its interest to submit a Resolution Plan for the Asian Colours Coated Ispat Ltd, this email was marked to all CoC members. No financial proposal was provided in the said letter. ll this reflect that Appellant wanted to enter fray nearly one year after CoC approval of Resolution Plan; it neither qualifies as Resolution Applicant nor as prospective Resolution Applicant or successful or unsuccessful Resolution Applicant and hence cannot be termed as aggrieved party. Appellant may be termed as an outsider standing on the sidelines. Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process is time bound, value maximization has also to be in timebound manner. All this lead us to sum up that Appellant is neither an aggrieved party in the process of CIRP nor he has a locus stand to file the appeal.

Related Posts

Scroll to Top