Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + Tri Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2021 (4) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (4) TMI 577 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyApproval of Resolution Plan - Section 30 (6) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 read with Regulation 39 (4) of the IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations 2016 - HELD THAT:- Upon perusal of the approved Resolution plan, the Bench has observed that out of ₹ 150.70 crores of total Debt amount to various creditors, stakeholders the SRA proposed to pay ₹ 30.07 crores as the Final Resolution Amount i.e. approx. 20% of the total Resolution debt amount. Even out of this ₹ 12 crores will be generated through sale of assets of Non-Core Business of the CD thereby the SRA will bring in only ₹ 18 crores i.e 12% of the total outstanding Resolution Debt amount or approx. 60% of the Resolution Plan value. In case the SRA could not realise, monetise the said amount of ₹ 12 crores, how the shortfall will be met, alternate funding mechanism (time frame within which period the said amount will be paid) etc, are not provided in the CoC approved plan. However, the CoC after exercising its commercial wisdom approved the Resolution plan with requisite majority. The Resolution Plan has been approved by the CoC in the 12th meeting held on 09.11.2019 with 73.15% votes. In K Sashidhar v. Indian Overseas Bank & Others [2019 (2) TMI 1043 - SUPREME COURT] the Hon’ble Apex Court held that if the CoC had approved the Resolution Plan by requisite percent of voting share, then as per section 30(6) of the Code, it is imperative for the Resolution Professional to submit the same to the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT). On receipt of such a proposal, the Adjudicating Authority is required to satisfy itself that the Resolution Plan as approved by CoC meets the requirements specified in Section 30(2). The Hon’ble Court observed that the role of the NCLT is ‘no more and no less’ - In COMMITTEE OF CREDITORS OF ESSAR STEEL INDIA LIMITED THROUGH AUTHORISED SIGNATORY VERSUS SATISH KUMAR GUPTA & OTHERS [2019 (11) TMI 731 - SUPREME COURT] the Hon’ble Apex Court clearly laid down that the Adjudicating Authority would not have power to modify the Resolution Plan which the CoC in their commercial wisdom have approved. The instant Resolution Plan meets the requirements of Section 30(2) of the Code and Regulations 37, 38, 38(1A) and 39 (4) of the Regulations. The Resolution Plan is not in contravention of any of the provisions of Section 29A of the Code and is in accordance with law - the resolution plan is approved. application allowed.
|