9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (10) TMI 892 - AT - Insolvency and BankruptcyCorrectness of approved Resolution Plan - only 16% of the Dues of the Contractors / Operational Creditors has been allowed in the said Resolution Plan - violation of Section 30(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - HELD THAT - This Tribunal while dealing with the batch of Appeals filed by the Employees of the Corporate Debtor Company in MRS. C.G. VIJYALAKSHMI VERSUS SHRI KUMAR RAJAN, RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL, HINDUSTAN NEWSPRINT LIMITED, (CORPORATE DEBTOR) , COMMITTEE OF CREDITORS OF THE CORPORATE DEBTOR THROUGH RBL BANK LTD., RESOLUTION APPLICANT 2023 (3) TMI 18 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , CHENNAI , challenging the very same Resolution Plan and the Order of the Adjudicating Authority, dated 29.01.2021, has allowed the Appeals in Part - it is specifically observed that this Tribunal, did not find any material irregularity in the Approval of the Resolution Plan, except for directing the Successful Resolution Applicant to make payment of the unpaid Provident Fund and Gratuity Fund and pending dues to the Employees, till the date of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, after deducting the amounts already paid. Regarding the rest of the allegations raised by the Appellants, this Tribunal , did not find any evidence to support their contentions. As the Resolution Plan has already been implemented way back in the year 2021, specifically keeping in view that this Tribunal has confirmed the Approval of the Resolution Plan by the Adjudicating Authority, except for payment of unpaid Provident Fund and Gratuity Fund, this Tribunal does not find any merit in these Appeals. Appeal dismissed.
Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment include challenges to the Approval of the Resolution Plan by Operational Creditors, non-joinder of necessary parties, payment of dues to employees, and the finality of the Order in the absence of an appeal to the Supreme Court. Operational Creditors' Challenge to Resolution Plan: The appeals were filed by Operational Creditors challenging the Approval of the Resolution Plan dated 29.01.2021. The Appellants argued that only 16% of the Dues of the Contractors/Operational Creditors were allowed in the Plan, leading to gross injustice. They contended that lack of proper representation in the Committee of Creditors meetings prevented them from challenging the meager amounts allocated to them, violating Section 30(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Non-Joinder of Necessary Parties: The Respondent/Financial Creditor argued that the Appeal was defective due to the non-joinder of necessary parties, namely, the Successful Resolution Professional (SRA) and the Resolution Professional (RP), and sought dismissal of the Appeal on this ground. Payment of Plan Amount and Implementation: The 2nd Respondent stated that the Resolution Applicant had paid the entire Plan amount of Rs.145.6016 Crore before 20.03.2021, and the Plan had been implemented accordingly. Judicial Findings and Previous Decisions: The Tribunal, in a related case, allowed the appeals in part, directing the Successful Resolution Applicant to make payments towards unpaid Provident Fund, Gratuity Fund, and pending dues to the Employees. The Tribunal did not find material irregularity in the Approval of the Resolution Plan, except for the specified payments. In another set of appeals, the Tribunal dismissed the challenges to the Resolution Plan based on previous observations. Finality of the Order and Dismissal of Appeals: The Tribunal noted that the Order had attained finality due to the absence of any challenge before the Supreme Court. As the Resolution Plan had already been implemented, with the Tribunal confirming its Approval except for specific payments, the Appeals were dismissed. The Appeals were dismissed, and no costs were awarded. The connected pending IA Nos. 144, 155, and 156 of 2022 were closed as well.
|
