9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 1347X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with in exercise of jurisdiction by the Adjudicating Authority or by this Tribunal. The submission of Learned Counsel for the Appellant that no reasons have been given by the CoC for rejecting the plan has also no legs to stand when a decision is taken after due deliberation. The decision of the CoC is reflected in the result of the voting which cannot be questioned. In so far as reliance on 14th CoC meeting dated 22.07.2021 is concerned, the Resolution Professional has brought into notice of CoC about the e-mail send by Resolution Applicant revisiting his offer, which fact although was noticed but no decision was taken by CoC to consider the e-mail by reversing its earlier decision of rejection of plan. Thus, the minutes of 14th CoC in no manner helps the Appellants. Thus, no error has been committed by Adjudicating Authority in directing for liquidation of the Corporate Debtor. No grounds have been made out to interfere with the Impugned Order dated 26th October, 2021 passed by the Adjudicating Authority - appeal dismissed. - Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 204 of 2022 Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 211 of 2022 - - - Dated:- 28-9-2022 - [ Justice Ashok Bhush ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sh, Learned Sr. Counsel advancing submissions on behalf of Resolution Applicant submits that Resolution Applicant had submitted the Resolution Plan which was with support of employees of the Corporate Debtor who were interested in reviving the Corporate Debtor. The Adjudicating Authority vide Order dated 21st May, 2019 has allowed the Application filed by the Resolution Applicant and directed the Resolution Professional and Committee of Creditors to consider the Resolution Plan of the Resolution Applicant. A presentation of the plan submitted by the Resolution Applicant was made before the CoC in the 12th CoC Meeting held on 07th June, 2019. The Resolution Applicant highlighted the relevant portion of the Resolution Plan and amount of Rs. 17 Crores was proposed in the Resolution Plan of the Corporate Debtor. 25% of the said amount was to be paid within 30 days from the receipt of the Order of the Hon ble Adjudicating Authority and balance within six months. It is submitted that the plan value being more than the liquidation value of the Corporate Debtor, the Adjudicating Authority ought to have approved the Resolution Plan. Further in 13th CoC Meeting held on 18th June, 2019, the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 019 of Rs. 50 Lakhs and plan again came for consideration in 13th CoC Meeting held on 18th June, 2019. Representative of the Resolution Applicant prayed for waiving the condition for submitting Performance Guarantee. With regard to sources of fund, it was submitted that Resolution Applicant is discussing with certain investors who have shown their interest in investing in the Corporate Debtor. After the plan is approved by the Adjudicating Authority, the Applicant shall be able to pay the balance 25% and thereafter 75%. It is further submitted that after detailed discussion it was decided to put the plan to e-vote and in the e-voting which was held on 21st June, 2019, the Plan of the Resolution Applicant was rejected by 71.44 % vote. In favour of the plan, there was only 8.61% vote. It is submitted that only plan which was received in the Resolution Process having been rejected, there was no option left except the liquidation of the Corporate Debtor and no error has been committed by the Adjudicating Authority in approving the Liquidation of the Corporate Debtor. 7. Mr. Dinkar Singh appearing for the Committee of Creditors submitted that during the discussion both in 12th CoC Me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CoC for rejecting the plan of the Resolution Applicant. There was no sufficient opportunity given to the Resolution Applicant. In the 07th CoC Meeting, Resolution Applicant has made a request to permit the Resolution Applicant to make a presentation before the CoC of the Resolution Plan which permission was granted and a Resolution Plan was presented by one Mr. M.S. Saggu, who was part of the Resolution Applicant Team. The Plan was presented where with regard to the value of the Corporate Debtor Rs. 17 Crores was mentioned and it was mentioned that 25% shall be paid within 30 days from the receipt of the Order of the Adjudicating Authority and balance within six months. The presentation of plan is captured in the minutes of 12th CoC Meeting in 4 pages. Queries were raised by the Resolution Professional, whose Reply was also given by the Resolution Applicant. In 12th CoC Meeting, Resolution Applicant requested one opportunity to deposit the EMD. CoC Members also interacted with Resolution Applicant. It is useful to extract the following part of the minutes of the CoC containing the interaction with CoC Members: One of the CoC member intervened and asked the Resolution Applican ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... even think that he will be in a position to pay the entire plan amount. 13. Detailed discussion regarding plan is recorded in the minutes which indicate meaningful interaction of the CoC Members in the 12th CoC Meeting with the Resolution Applicant. The CoC gave 10 days time to Resolution Applicant to comply the shortcomings in the plan and it was decided that CoC meeting will be held again. The next CoC meeting was held on 18th June, 2019 (13th CoC Meeting) where the Resolution Applicant mentioned that EMD of 50 Lakhs have been arranged. Detail interaction with CoC Members has been separately recorded in the minutes. Before the CoC, Resolution Professional has summarized the issue. Following portion of minutes is relevant to notice: Discussion within the CoC Members BOB questioned regarding Mr. J P Chaturvedi and his eligibility? The RP mentioned that there are 2 ways of verification of 29A compliance. One from the external sources wherein he has checked and verified that he was never a director in the group companies of the corporate debtor nor he has held any other senior managerial post in the corporate debtor. While the other aspect of the compliance is with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ria and denying PBG, how can you say that they are serious? What the RA has done is the past 10 days is only provided the EMD. One of the COC member mentioned that they had made it very clear before the RA in the previous COC Meeting that these four conditions are very crucial in order to consider the resolution plan. 14. In the minutes, queries raised by the different CoC members, doubts expressed by them has been recorded in the minutes. It was ultimately decided that Resolution Plan be put to e-voting on 20th June, 2019 and 21st June, 2019. e-Voting was conducted and the result of the e-Voting has been brought on record in the counter affidavit on behalf of Respondent No. 1. On the resolution, Item No. 1, to approve the Resolution Plan, 8.61% were received for the plan. 71.44% vote was received against the plan and 19.95% votes abstained from voting. There being 71.44% negative voting, plan failed. 15. When we look into the minutes of 12th and 13th CoC Meeting, it is clear that there is elaborate consideration of Resolution Plan submitted by the Resolution Applicant. Several questions, queries and doubts expressed by the CoC members have been recorded in the minutes afte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
