9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (6) TMI 651X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Appellant who ranked 6th among the 'Resolution Applicants' cannot have any right to participate for re-negotiation over the decision of the 'Committee of Creditors'. In COMMITTEE OF CREDITORS OF ESSAR STEEL INDIA LIMITED THROUGH AUTHORISED SIGNATORY VERSUS SATISH KUMAR GUPTA OTHERS [ 2019 (11) TMI 731 - SUPREME COURT] , the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the commercial aspects of a 'Resolution Plan', its viability or otherwise, and, distribution of proceeds amongst stakeholders, were to be looked only by the 'Committee of Creditors' who are competent to go through all relevant aspects. Therefore, this Appellate Tribunal cannot deliberate on such issue. In the present case, as no ground has bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the terms of the 'Request for Resolution Plan', only the top three 'Resolution Applicants' are being invited to present their plans before the 'Committee of Creditors'. Within three days, on 4th November, 2019, the Appellant contacted the 'Resolution Professional' telephonically and through e-mail and sought an opportunity to negotiate and/or revise/enhance its bid/offer of the H1 'Resolution Applicant'. 2.2. It is stated that the 'Resolution Professional' by e-mail dated 4th November, 2019 reiterated the denial of the opportunity of discussion and negotiation to the Appellant. On 5th November, 2019, the Appellant once again sends an e-mail seeking to renegotiate his offer, however, the &# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t' is ready to revise its proposal and such revised proposal is more than the amount offered by H1 Applicant, the 'Committee of Creditors' should accept the same in the interest of stakeholders. 2.7. Reliance has been placed on the decision of this Appellate Tribunal in Binani Industries Ltd. v. Bank of Baroda [2018] 99 taxmann.com 164/150 SCL 703 (NCL - AT) to suggest that the 'Committee of Creditors' can consider it before completion of 180 days or 270 days. 2.8. According to learned counsel for the Appellant, a revised plan is in continuation of the 'Resolution Plan' already submitted and accepted by the 'Resolution Professional'. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. Surya Kant Satapa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aluation of a 'Resolution Plan'. The 'Request for Resolution Plan' clearly sets out that the 'Committee of Creditors' would negotiate only with the top three 'Resolution Applicants'. 6. The 'Resolution Plans' submitted by the Appellant and others were presented before the 'Committee of Creditors' and the Appellant scored 39.40% of voting shares and was ranked 6th as per the evaluation criteria set out in the 'Request for Resolution Plan'. 7. It was submitted that the e-mail dated 4th November, 2019 cannot be considered a revised financial proposal/resolution plan. The contents of the e-mail are vague, unclear and did not specify a concrete amount the Appellant was offering. The & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9;Committee of Creditors' who are competent to go through all relevant aspects. Therefore, this Appellate Tribunal cannot deliberate on such issue. 11. The 'Resolution Plan' approved by the Adjudicating Authority can be challenged only on the ground as mentioned in section 61(3), as under:- 61. Appeals and Appellate Authority.─ . . . . . . . . . . .(3) An appeal against an order approving a resolution plan under section 31 may be filed on the following grounds, namely:- (i) the approved resolution plan is in contravention of the provisions of any law for the time being in force; (ii) there has been material irregularity in exercise of the powers by the resolution professional during the corporate ins ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
