Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + Tri Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2021 (4) TMI Tri This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2021 (4) TMI 1313 - Tri - Insolvency and Bankruptcy


Issues Involved:
1. Approval of the Resolution Plan under Section 30(6) and 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
2. Compliance with the requirements under Regulation 38 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016.
3. Consideration of stakeholders' interests.
4. Implementation schedule of the Resolution Plan.
5. Extinguishment of claims, concessions, and reliefs in the Resolution Plan.
6. Jurisdiction of the Adjudicating Authority in commercial decisions of the Committee of Creditors (CoC).
7. Dismissal of IA 130 of 2021 as infructuous.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Approval of the Resolution Plan:
The application was filed by the Resolution Professional (RP) of the Corporate Debtor under Sections 30(6) and 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IB Code) seeking approval of the Resolution Plan along with addendums. The CoC approved the Resolution Plan submitted by Bharat Forge Limited with a 100% majority voting share. The RP confirmed that the Resolution Plan complies with the requirements under Section 30 of the IB Code.

2. Compliance with Regulation 38:
The Resolution Plan was examined to ensure it meets the mandatory contents as stipulated under Regulation 38 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016. The plan identified specific sources of funds for paying insolvency resolution process costs, liquidation value due to operational creditors, and liquidation value due to dissenting financial creditors. It also included a statement on how it dealt with the interests of all stakeholders.

3. Consideration of Stakeholders' Interests:
The Resolution Applicant took into account the interests of all stakeholders of the Corporate Debtor. The tabular summary of payments to creditors under the approved Resolution Plan included provisions for IRP costs, workmen and employee dues, secured financial creditors, and other operational creditors. The plan also addressed the claims of financial creditors, operational creditors, and other stakeholders.

4. Implementation Schedule:
The implementation schedule proposed by the Resolution Applicant was detailed, with specific timelines for actions such as the establishment of an acquisition SPV, delisting of the Corporate Debtor, opting for a concessional tax regime, and infusion of funds into the Corporate Debtor. The schedule was designed to ensure timely and effective implementation of the Resolution Plan.

5. Extinguishment of Claims, Concessions, and Reliefs:
The judgment clarified that no claims against the Resolution Applicant would lie from the date of approval of the Resolution Plan. Any pending proceedings before competent authorities would require the Resolution Applicant to approach them for appropriate orders. The approval of the Resolution Plan did not automatically waive or abate legal proceedings pending by or against the Corporate Debtor.

6. Jurisdiction of the Adjudicating Authority:
The judgment referenced the Supreme Court's decisions in K. Sashidhar vs. Indian Overseas Bank and Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Limited v. Satish Kumar Gupta, emphasizing that the Adjudicating Authority has limited jurisdiction to interfere in the commercial decisions of the CoC. The CoC's decision on the Resolution Plan is final, and the Adjudicating Authority's role is limited to ensuring compliance with the IB Code's objectives.

7. Dismissal of IA 130 of 2021:
The application IA 130 of 2021, filed by a shareholder and promoter of the Corporate Debtor, sought to implement the terms of a settlement and withdraw the CIRP. However, since the Resolution Plan was already approved by the CoC and the Adjudicating Authority, the application was dismissed as infructuous.

Conclusion:
The National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad, approved the Resolution Plan submitted by Bharat Forge Limited, confirming its compliance with the IB Code and Regulation 38. The plan addressed the interests of all stakeholders and included a detailed implementation schedule. The judgment emphasized the limited jurisdiction of the Adjudicating Authority in commercial decisions of the CoC and dismissed IA 130 of 2021 as infructuous.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates