2021 (2) TMI 1233 - Tri - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Seeking to submit the revised Resolution Plan before CoC for legal consideration and on merits - HELD THAT - The order of this Bench is required, to take any further step in the process. She further added that though the plan was not put before CoC meeting but oral opinion was taken from CoC members and the CoC is of the view that after the order of this Bench, the same can be considered. The Resolution is the prime purpose of the Code. CoC is directed to consider the revised plan submitted by the present Applicant for consideration - application allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
Application for submission of revised Resolution Plan after rejection by CoC due to conditions mentioned therein, timing of submission after expiry of voting period, direction to CoC to consider the revised plan, requirement to put other three plans for voting, timeline for completion of the process.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an application filed by the Resolution Applicant seeking to submit a revised Resolution Plan before the Committee of Creditors (CoC) for legal consideration and on merits. The Applicant's Counsel highlighted that the revised plan has been modified by removing all the conditions that led to the initial rejection by the CoC. The Resolution Professional, representing the Respondent, argued that the revised plan was received after the voting period had ended, preventing its consideration by the CoC. However, it was mentioned that the CoC members orally expressed their willingness to consider the revised plan once the Tribunal's order was obtained. The Tribunal emphasized the prime purpose of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, which is resolution, and thus allowed the application. The CoC was directed to review the revised plan submitted by the Applicant. Furthermore, the Resolution Professional was instructed to ensure that the other three plans are also presented for voting as per regulations. A timeline of 3 weeks was set for completing the process, after which the CoC would decide whether to approve the Plan or opt for liquidation. Ultimately, the application was allowed and disposed of based on the Tribunal's order.

This judgment addresses the critical issue of the submission and consideration of a revised Resolution Plan following its initial rejection by the CoC. The timing of the revised plan's submission after the expiry of the voting period raised concerns, but the Tribunal's decision to allow its consideration underscores the importance of achieving resolution under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The directive to the CoC to evaluate the revised plan, along with the requirement to present other plans for voting, demonstrates the procedural adherence and fairness in the insolvency resolution process. The specified timeline for completing the process ensures efficiency and timely decision-making, balancing the interests of all stakeholders involved in the insolvency proceedings. By providing clear directions and upholding the objectives of the Code, this judgment contributes to the effective resolution of corporate insolvency cases while maintaining procedural integrity and transparency.