Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + Tri Companies Law - 2019 (9) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (9) TMI 1618 - Tri - Companies LawValidity of Resolution Plan - opportunity to improve the plan value to match with intrinsic value of CD - inter-se bidding - HELD THAT:- Both the valuers have stated that they have assigned zero value to intangible assets since there are warning letters issued by the concerned authorities. Assignment of value lessor than the value shown in the Balance Sheet by the valuer for the tangible assets is based on the present market condition of the assets. Further valuation is a specialised subject dealt by independent persons who are experts having specialised skills and knowledge and this bench cannot analyse valuation to form an opinion upon its correctness, unless contrary is proved based on strong and undisputable evidence. The Applicant have contended that they are not interested in driving the Corporate Debtor to be sold in slump sale but in the event of auction proceedings under liquidation process, if the Corporate Debtor is sold in slump sale as a going concern, the lenders may get much higher price than the value offered by the valuers. The Applicant conveniently ignored the fact that the Code provides for a particular process in which the CIRP has to be conducted and suggesting a new method which is totally against the Provisions of the Code cannot be appreciated. It is irrelevant to discuss whether a creditor will get more or less in liquidation, at the stage of Resolution, since an argument can never be based on a hypothetical situation. Inter se bidding - HELD THAT:- It is to be noted that the Committee of Creditors have to approve a Resolution Plan by a voting of 66% of Financial Creditors after considering its feasibility and viability and such other requirement as may be specified by the Board. The CoC is not empowered to select two or more Resolution Plans and to go for inter se bidding among them. In view of this, there is no question of Inter se bidding before the CoC or before the Adjudicating Authority - as held in the land mark judgment of M/S. INNOVENTIVE INDUSTRIES LTD. VERSUS ICICI BANK & ANR. [2017 (9) TMI 58 - SUPREME COURT]. by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it is of utmost importance that a CIRP process should end in a period of 270 days. The Code envisages that the whole CIRP process have to be completed within a period 270 days including the extension granted under Section 12 of the Code. Therefore, if a fresh valuation is ordered as prayed for by the Applicant, this will contravene Section 12 of the Code. No fresh valuation is required in this case - Application dismissed.
|