9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 1160X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iod for which the plan has been approved. This has been explained by the Supreme Court in The Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Limited v. Satish Kumar Gupta [ 2019 (11) TMI 731 - SUPREME COURT] where it was held that A successful resolution Applicant cannot suddenly be faced with undecided claims after the resolution plan submitted by him has been accepted as this would amount to a hydra head popping up which would throw into uncertainty amounts payable by a prospective resolution Applicant who successfully take over the business of the corporate debtor. In the present case, once the resolution plan was approved by the NCLT, and affirmed by the NCLAT in appeal, it was not open to Opposite Party No.2, which in fact par ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovember, 2015 (Annexures 2 3 respectively) raising a demand of Rs.1.98 crores. 3. The facts in brief are that on 18th November 2014, the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) admitted a petition filed by the Petitioner for financial rehabilitation. In the meanwhile, on account of the Petitioner's default in making repayment, one of the creditors, i.e., SREI Equipment Finance Ltd. (SREI) filed an application before the National Company Law Tribunal ('NCLT') under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). The NCLT appointed an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP), who issued a public announcement under Section 15 of the IBC inviting claims. 4. The admitted position is that the Opposite Party No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the IRP informed them that the claim had not been submitted in the proper form. 8. The settled legal position is that once a resolution plan is approved by the CoC and meets the requirements of Section 30 (2) of the IBC, it is binding on all creditors, guarantors, employees and other stake holders. From the point of view of the company that is undergoing the reconstruction, it cannot after the resolution plan is approved, be faced with fresh claims pertaining to the very period for which the plan has been approved. This has been explained by the Supreme Court in The Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Limited v. Satish Kumar Gupta 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1478 as under: 67. For the same reason, the impugned NCLAT judgment in holdi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion plan submitted by GMSPL was a better offer than the other two resolution applicants, including EARC and that the Adjudicating Authority has rightly approved the resolution plan of GMSPL. After coming to such finding, the only option available with NCLAT was to dismiss the appeals. In our view, the observations made in the aforesaid paragraphs, if permitted to remain, would totally frustrate the object of I B Code of revival of a Corporate Debtor and to resurrect it as a going concern. As held by this Court, the successful resolution applicant cannot be flung with surprise claims which are not part of the resolution plan. 10. In the present case, once the resolution plan was approved by the NCLT, and affirmed by the NCLAT in appeal, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
