9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 1072X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Appellant sent a letter dated 12.08.2021 where it sought for modification for the repayment Plan promising to deposit Rs.25 Crores in a no-lien account and a balance 15 Crores within three weeks from the date of approval - there are force in the contention of the Learned Counsel for the First Respondent that though the other CoC members, SBI and IDBI, did not accept the modified payment terms, the First Respondent being the majority voting shareholder of the CoC accepted the modified payment terms way back on 29.09.2021, but the Appellant did not comply with the terms and hence, no further opportunities are required to be given. It is evident from the record that though almost two and half years has lapsed from the date of approval of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing Liquidation. Appeal dismissed. - [ Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain ] Member ( Judicial ) And [ Shreesha Merla ] Member ( Technical ) For the Appellant : Mr. P. H. Arvindh Pandian , Senior Advocate For Ms. Tahura Anzar , Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. ML. Ganesh , Advocate for Caveator Mr. T. Ravichandran , Advocate , For R3 ORDER ( Virtual Mode ) [ Per : Shreesha Merla , Member ( Technical ) ] 1. Aggrieved by the Impugned Order dated 31.10.2023 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Bengaluru Bench in IA. No. 404/BB/2023 in CP (IB) No. 68/BB/2018, whereby and whereunder the Adjudicating Authority has allowed Liquidation of the Corporate Debtor Company, M/s. Linen Art Pvt. Ltd. / the Appellant / ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amount from Rs.160 Crores to Rs.169.22 Crores. It is submitted that the First Respondent vide letter dated 05.10.2021 replied that the other suggestions for modifications would be examined at the appropriate time. It is submitted that the delay was caused due to the acts of the Respondent Bank and that the CoC had accepted the modification of the Resolution Plan in part by their own letter dated 29.09.2021 and cannot be permitted to approbate and reprobate at the same time. 4. It is submitted that the Appellant was willing to arrange for Rs.35 Crores as on 02.02.2023 and also produced a letter from an interested Company for purchase of Peenya Plant for Rs. 41.60 Crores and also arranged Rs.50 Crores on 21.02.2023 and sought to deposit th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roceeding, the Appellant filed IA No. 29 / 2021 seeking modification of Plan and cited the forensic audit and the Pandemic situation as reasons for failing for implementation of the Plan. Several rounds of discussions were held and the Appellant sent a letter dated 12.08.2021 stating that it was ready to deposit Rs.25 Crores in a no-lien account and the balance Rs.15 Crores would be paid within three weeks from the date of approval. Except for the First Respondent, all other CoC members rejected the modified Plan. The First Respondent being a majority shareholder of the CoC accepted the modified Plan, but the Appellant failed to apply even with the revised Plan Despite repeated communication. More than two and half years has lapsed and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A No. 29 / 2021 seeking modification of the Resolution Plan, on the ground that the forensic audit and the Pandemic have delayed the implementation of the Plan. It is seen from the record that the Adjudicating Authority vide a common Order dated 09.03.2021 disposed of all the three Applications IA Nos. 87,443 / 2023 IA No. 29 / 2021 with a direction to the CoC to reconsider the grievance of the SRA and take a reasonable and dispassionate decision on the issue by keeping in mind the object of the Code. Admittedly there were several rounds of discussions held and the Appellant sent a letter dated 12.08.2021 where it sought for modification for the repayment Plan promising to deposit Rs.25 Crores in a no-lien account and a balance 15 Crores ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2021. Therefore, the contention of the Learned Counsel for the Appellant that if the Appellant is allowed to manage the Corporate Debtor Company, the Appellant shall repay the money to the Bank in a short period , is untenable, specifically having regard to the fact that the Plan was approved way back in 2019, IBC is a time-bound process, and several opportunities were given for implementation of the original Plan as well as the modified Plan. Keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon ble Apex Court in Ebix Singapore Pvt. Ltd. vs. Educomp Solutions Ltd. reported in (2022) 2 SCC 401, wherein the Hon ble Apex Court has clearly emphasised the importance of adhering to strict timelines, keeping in view the scope and objective of the Code. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
