9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 121X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Nayak and Ms. Isha J. Kumar, Advocates for R-3. ORDER Appellant - 'IIFCL Mutual Fund', who had 3.94% voting share as member of the Committee of Creditors in the Resolution Process of 'GVR Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd.' (Corporate Debtor) and who voted in favour of the approval of the Resolution Plan submitted by 'UVARC' (Successful Resolution Applicant) has filed the instant appeal assailing the approval of the Resolution Plan of the Successful Resolution Applicant as regards distribution mechanism. The Appellant in terms of the impugned order is also aggrieved of dismissal of its application being MA No. 99 of 2020 in C.P. No. 941/IB/2018 seeking revision of share proportion of the resolution fund amongst the Secured Financial Creditors equal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Committee of Creditors, voted in favour of the approval of Resolution Plan of the Successful Resolution Applicant. The Appellant appears to be aggrieved of allocation of Rs. 135 Crores by the Resolution Professional in regard to uninvoked Bank Guarantees. From the record, it comes to fore that the total admitted claims of the Financial Creditors of Rs. 2271.08 Crores were to be settled for an amount of Rs. 352 Crores. This included claim for a total amount of 86,09,59,759/- submitted by Appellant which had been admitted by the Resolution Professional. It further appears that it is post-approval of the Resolution Plan submitted by the Successful Resolution Applicant that the Appellant filed M.A. 99 of 2020 seeking direction from the Adju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ors taken collectively or their individual opinions are not open to challenge. In 'Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Limited Vs. Satish Kumar Gupta and Others' (Civil Appeal No. 8766-67 of 2019)', (2019) SCC OnLine SC 1478, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that the limited judicial review available under section 30(2) to the Adjudicating Authority and under Section 61(3) to the Appellate Tribunal cannot trespass upon the business decision of the majority of the Committee of Creditors. The parameters of limited judicial review stand clearly laid down in K. Shashidhar's case (supra). 5. Taking a holistic view of the provisions of the successful resolution plan into account, the Adjudicating Authority was of the view that the same was no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Professional, who had no role to play when the proposed Resolution Plan emanating from the Successful Resolution Applicant was put to vote by the Committee of Creditors. The scope of judicial review under Section 61(3) of I&B Code being limited to grounds enumerated therein and no material irregularity having been shown to have occurred during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process before approval of the Resolution Plan by the Committee of Creditors, we are of the considered opinion that the Appellant has no case. It is not the Appellant's grievance that he has been discriminated against as a dissenting Financial Creditor or that his admitted claim has not been taken into consideration while allocating the amount in terms of the distr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
