Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + Tri Companies Law - 2022 (4) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (4) TMI 412 - Tri - Companies LawEligibility of prospective Resolution Applicant - whether the final decision on the eligibility of the prospective Resolution Applicant U/s 29A lies with the RP or with the CoC? - HELD THAT:- In terms of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Arcelormittal India Private Limited v/s Satish Kumar Gupta [2018 (10) TMI 312 - SUPREME COURT], Section 29A has been noticed along with Sections 30 & 25(2)(i) of the Code, it has been stated therein that the RP is not required to take any decision but merely to ensure that the Resolution Plans submitted are complete in all respects before they are placed before the CoC who may or may not approve it. The fact that the RP is required to confirm that the Resolution Plan is not contrary to any of the provisions of law (that includes Section 29A of the Code) only means that a prima facie opinion is to be given to the CoC that a law has or has not been contravened. Section 30(2)(e) does not empower the RP to decide whether the Resolution Plan does or does not contravene the provisions of law. The RP is a facilitator and not a gatekeeper. In these circumstances, the ends of justice would be met if the RP is directed to place all Resolution Plans along with his opinion on the contravention or otherwise of the various provisions of law before the CoC which should take a considered view in the matter, if not already done. Application disposed off.
|