TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 1028X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in this appeal challenging the Resolution Plan approved, without getting decided I.A. No. 929 of 2021, one way or other. The appeal is disposed of as premature with liberty to the Appellant to raise admissible issues. - Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 443 of 2021 - - - Dated:- 28-6-2021 - [Justice A.I.S. Cheema] The Officiating Chairperson And [Dr. Alok Srivastava] Member (Technical) For the Appellant: Mr. Amit Sibal, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Misha, Mr. Siddhant Kant and Ms. Moulshree Shukla, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Arun Kathpalia, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Liz Mathew, Ms. Sonali Jain and Mr. Rohan Rajadhyaksha, Advocates for R-1. Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Mr. Ashish Dholakia, Sr. Advocates with Mr. Avishkar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as per the Articles of the Joint Venture Company mentioned above. It is argued that the Resolution Applicant sought certain reliefs and waivers under the Resolution Plan and it is claimed that the same impacts rights of the Appellant. According to the Appellant, the relief sought by the Resolution Applicant would impact future and uncrystallised liabilities arising from the rights clamed including those arising from certain put option rights in the SHA which would be extinguished. It is argued and mentioned in the appeal that the Appellant is aggrieved with the impugned order as follows: The Appellant is aggrieved to the extent that the Impugned Order: (a) allows the application for approval of resolution plan being I.A. 449/202 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Reconstruction Company Limited., (2021 SCC OnLine SC 213) ( Ghanshyam Mishra ). Consequently, these observations of the Ld. Adjudicating Authority applied to the reliefs sought against the Appellant and would amount to pre-deciding the Appellant s Application on merits, without considering if Ghanshyam Mishra would be applicable to the facts of the case. (d) The Impugned Order, to the extent it has the effect of granting reliefs against the Appellant, does so without giving the Appellant a right of hearing, and without a just or proper adjudication of the Appellant s Application on merits, and without even applying its mind to the facts or prayers of the Appellant s Application opposing such reliefs which is sub judice before the Ld ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or indirectly; and/or (c) Pass an order rejecting the Resolution Plan, if and to the extent that it unilaterally alters/ amends/modifies the mutually agreed terms of the SHA, Distribution Agreement and Articles or affects or extinguishes the rights of the Applicant and obligations and liabilities of the Corporate Debtor under the SHA, Distribution Agreement and Articles, in whatsoever manner, whether directly or indirectly, and/or (d) Pass an order directing the Respondents to modify the Resolution Plan, if and to extent that it unilaterally alters/ amends/ modifies the mutually agreed terms of the SHA. Distribution Agreement and Articles or affects or extinguishes the rights of the Applicant and obligations and liabilities of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its approval by this Hon ble Tribunal, shall be binding on the Corporate Debtor and its employees, members, creditors, guarantors and other stakeholders involved in the Resolution Plan; c) Grant such reliefs as specifically sought by Respondent No. 2 (the Successful Resolution Applicant) under the Resolution Plan, including as set out in Part C of the Resolution Plan. 7. The Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the concern of the Administrator regarding Resolution Plan was with regard to prayer (a) and (b) and that prayer (c) was left for the Successful Resolution Applicant to convince the Adjudicating Authority. It is stated that the Resolution Plan which has been approved, is as was produced and which was approved by the CoC. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at modification in Concession Agreement without approval of concerned authority, that is, YEIDA, established by State Government could not have been done in Resolution Plan. 10. Counsel for the parties are raising such and various issues with regard to the rights claimed by the Appellant and whether or not the Appellant has right to question the Resolution Plan. We are not elaborating or commenting on the same for the reason that I.A. No. 449 of 2021 is admittedly stated to be coming up before the Adjudicating Authority on 30th June, 2021. Without rights claimed by Appellant being adjudicated before Adjudicating Authority, Appellant cannot maintain challenge to approval of Resolution Plan by way of Appeal. Keeping in view the prayers in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
