2023 (10) TMI 1120 - AT - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Rejection of application seeking a direction to the Resolution Professional to convene a meeting of the CoC to comply with the provision of Regulation 39(3)(b) of the CIRP - HELD THAT - The time for filing the Affidavit already extended by order dated 18.09.2023. Now the CoC having approved the Resolution Plan with voting share of 99.84%, Resolution Professional seeks liberty to file an application before the Adjudicating Authority for approval of the Resolution Plan - Considering the facts of the present case, the highest Resolution Plan having now received the majority of votes, the Resolution Professional may file an application before the Adjudicating Authority for approval of the plan which may be done within three weeks from today. Nothing survives to be decided in this Appeal - Appeal disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved:
The rejection of the application seeking a direction to convene a meeting of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) to comply with CIRP regulations.

Summary:

Issue 1: Rejection of the application for convening CoC meeting:
The appeal was filed against the order rejecting an application to convene a meeting of the CoC to comply with CIRP regulations. The appellant argued that the plan submitted during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) did not receive the necessary votes for approval, triggering the need for revoting as per Regulation 39 of CIRP Regulation, 2016. The Resolution Professional contended that since the CIRP was closing, a meeting for revoting could not be convened. The Tribunal, citing Regulation 39, Sub-Regulation (3), 2nd Proviso, directed the Resolution Professional to convene a meeting of the CoC to revote on the plan with the highest votes. The Resolution Professional conducted the revoting, resulting in the approval of the Resolution Plan by 99.84% voting share in favor.

Issue 2: Approval of the Resolution Plan:
Following the successful revoting and approval of the Resolution Plan by the CoC, the Resolution Professional sought permission to file an application for approval of the plan before the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances and the majority approval received by the Resolution Plan, granted permission for the Resolution Professional to proceed with filing the application for approval within three weeks. Subsequently, the appeal was disposed of as there was no further decision required in light of the events that transpired.

This summary outlines the legal judgment involving the rejection of the application for convening a CoC meeting, the subsequent revoting process, and the approval of the Resolution Plan, leading to the disposal of the appeal.