NCLAT sets aside directions issued by NCLT to issue fresh Form-G where CoC in the exercise of its commercial wisdom has decided to only consider a Resolution Plan – Jaitnder Pal Singh Hanjra Vs. Vivek Raheja and Ors. – NCLAT New Delhi
March 15, 2024
Hon’ble NCLAT held that: (i) The maximization of the value of the Corporate Debtor is also admittedly an object of the CIRP. However, the said maximization has to be achieved within the timeline provided in the scheme. Needless to add, there has to be a respectful balance and harmony between the twin objectives of timely resolution and asset maximization. (ii) The CoC members took cognizance of the fact that CIRP period of 330 days stood expired and now that a resolution plan has come up seeking to provide substantially much more than the liquidation value, it decided to consider only this plan and place it for voting once the Adjudicating Authority allowed the extension of the CIRP period for which an IA was pending before the Adjudicating Authority. (iii) The CoC undertook an exercise to compare the resolution plans submitted by erstwhile applicants with that submitted by the Appellant and concluded that the plan value of the Appellant was distinctly better than the others. Clearly therefore all aspects of the plan including the plan value of the Appellant and other potential Resolution Applicants were in the knowledge of the CoC which on having been deliberated at length testifies the exercise of commercial wisdom by the CoC. (iv) This also shows that the CoC was well aware that the objective of IBC to ensure maximisation of the value of assets does not get defeated. As far as the plan value which was offered by the Appellant and the plan value which had been offered by other resolution applicants, evaluation of the same falls within the domain of commercial wisdom of CoC.