2024 (2) TMI 974 - AT - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Rejection of valuation report obtained by the RP from its valuers and direct him to consider the valuation reports dated 21.12.2022 given by Mr. Anil Kumar Saxena and Ms. Aditi Aggarwal - seeking appointment of fresh valuer to ascertain a fair value and liquidation value of the assets of Group Housing Society Known as IRIDIA in the matter of M/s Horizon Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. - HELD THAT - The Resolution Professional in the CIRP proceedings, appointed two valuers under Section 35 of the CIRP Regulations and the two valuers have submitted their valuation reports. There being difference of more than 10% in the valuation of two valuers, a third valuer was appointed. After completion of the valuation exercise, resolution plan was placed before the CoC for consideration. The CoC approved the Resolution Plan and application has already been filed by the Resolution Professional for approval of the plan before the Adjudicating Authority. Reliance placed on judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in Ramkrishna Forgings Limited vs. Ravindra Loonkar, Resolution Professional of ACIL Ltd. Anr. 2023 (11) TMI 910 - SUPREME COURT . In the said case, after approval of the Resolution Plan question of valuation was sought to be raised and the Adjudicating Authority has directed for valuation, which order was set aside by the Hon ble Supreme Court. The said judgment fully supports the submission of learned counsel for the Respondent. Thus, no error has been committed by the Adjudicating Authority in rejecting application filed by the Appellant - Appeal is dismissed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
The judgment deals with an application for condonation of delay in filing an appeal and an appeal filed against an order passed by the NCLT, New Delhi, Court-III regarding rejection of a valuation report and appointment of a fresh valuer in a matter related to a Group Housing Society known as IRIDIA.

Condonation of Delay in Filing Appeal:
The application sought condonation of a 13-day delay in filing the appeal due to renovation work causing the file to get misplaced and the Authorized Representative being unavailable. The delay was condoned after sufficient cause was shown.

Appeal Against NCLT Order on Valuation Report:
The appeal was filed against an order of NCLT rejecting the application seeking rejection of a valuation report and appointment of a fresh valuer. The Adjudicating Authority had noted that the Committee of Creditors had already approved the resolution, leading to the rejection of the application.

Contentions and Observations:
The Appellant contended that the application was authorized by the homebuyers and was maintainable despite the withdrawal of the earlier Authorized Representative. The Tribunal proceeded on the assumption that the Appellant was the authorized representative of the homebuyers.

Valuation and Resolution Plan Approval:
The Resolution Professional appointed two valuers whose reports showed a significant difference, leading to the appointment of a third valuer. The Resolution Plan was approved by the Committee of Creditors, and the Resolution Professional had filed for plan approval before the Adjudicating Authority.

Decision and Legal Precedent:
The Tribunal held that the Adjudicating Authority did not err in rejecting the application, as the valuation had been done as per regulations and the Resolution Plan had been approved. Reference was made to a Supreme Court judgment supporting the rejection of raising valuation issues post-approval of the Resolution Plan.

Conclusion:
Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the Adjudicating Authority's decision to reject the application. The judgment provides a comprehensive analysis of the valuation process, resolution plan approval, and the legal implications of challenging valuation post-approval.