Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + Tri Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2019 (5) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (5) TMI 1515 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyAdmission of Application - expression of interest - whether the proviso to Section 31(4) of the Code, is applicable in the present case or not? - HELD THAT:- In the present case, the amendment with respect to getting approval of CCI imposes an additional procedural obligation on the resolution applicants to furnish the approval from CCI before furnishing the resolution plan. Therefore, the amendment does not apply on the present CIRP proceedings. Hence, non-furnishing of the approval from CCI is no bar for the CoC or the RP to consider a resolution plan. Hence this objection raised by the Applicant that RPIF did not have a CCI approval as on the date of meeting i.e. 10.01.2019 stands rejected. Even otherwise, assuming that the aforesaid amendment was applicable in the present case, as on 10.01.2019 the Applicant itself did not have CCI's approval. CCI's approval was furnished on 11.01.2019, a day after the resolution plan of RPIF was approved. In that scenario, even if we assume that RPIF was ineligible to place a resolution plan before the CoC due to not having CCI's approval, but so was the case of the Applicant. The current position is that the RPIF has also furnished the necessary approval from CCI post the resolution plan was approved by the CoC. It is understood that the plain reading of the proviso to section 31(4) of the Code mandates the approval of CCI prior to approval of resolution plan by CoC as the word used in the statute is 'shall'. However, the intent of the legislature for introducing such mandatory requirement which poses an additional obligation on the resolution applicants is that post the approval of resolution plan, it should not be the case that the implementation of resolution becomes difficult due to absence of necessary approvals - Furthermore, it is not the case of the Applicant that the Resolution plan presented by it was approved on merits and merely due to this technical difficulty, rejected. Instead, as per the reasoning given by the RP and the CoC for rejection of the Resolution Plan of the Applicant, the Resolution plan of the Applicant did not even stood on merits due to the conditions and restrictions imposed in the plan. Commercial wisdom of CoC cannot be interfered with by the Adjudicating Authority. Definitely, it does not mean that Carte Blanche powers are given to RP & the CoC but to apply 'commercial mind' is the forte of the CoC and to apply the 'judicial mind' is forte of the Adjudicating authority. All this Tribunal is entitled to see is whether law as prescribed by the legislature has been complied with or not. The decision taken by the CoC in approving RPIF's resolution plan is not required to be interfered - As far as the legal and procedural requirements are concerned, prima facie, they are complete in all aspects and the same will be looked into further at the stage of approval of Resolution Plan by this Bench/Adjudicating Authority. Application dismissed.
|