Tribunal Stresses Compliance with Resolution Plans; Confirms Role of Suspended Management & Creditors Amid Pending Claims.

The Tribunal emphasized compliance with court directives regarding resolution plans, particularly concerning contingent claims like Enercon GmBh's pending Supreme Court decision. It acknowledged the eligibility of suspended management and operational creditors to access resolution plans and stressed the RP's non-adjudicatory role in updating claims. Despite a writ petition challenging Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code provisions, the Tribunal proceeded with the case, as no Supreme Court stay was in place, and scheduled a comprehensive hearing to address all pending matters, urging prompt completion of pleadings by the parties involved.

---

---

Issues involved:
- Compliance with court directions regarding resolution plans
- Access to resolution plans by suspended management
- Requirement of providing resolution plans to eligible persons
- Treatment of contingent claims
- Adjudicatory power of Resolution Professional
- Providing a copy of resolution plan to operational creditors
- Challenge to insolvency & Bankruptcy Code provisions

Compliance with court directions regarding resolution plans:
The Tribunal addressed the issue of compliance with court directions regarding resolution plans. It was noted that the Resolution Professional (RP) stated that directions had been substantially complied with, except for a matter involving Enercon GmBh, which was considered a contingent claim pending before the Supreme Court. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of complying with court mandates to avoid further complications in the matter.

Access to resolution plans by suspended management:
The suspended management contended that they were eligible to access all resolution plans submitted to the RP for consideration by the Committee of Creditors (CoC). They demanded copies of all plans and raised objections regarding the legality of proceeding to vote on a resolution plan without providing access to all eligible parties. The Tribunal acknowledged the debatable nature of whether all resolution plans should be supplied to eligible persons, including financial creditors, operational creditors, and members of suspended management.

Requirement of providing resolution plans to eligible persons:
The Tribunal referred to a decision by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal and emphasized that the RP should not ignore or exclude disputed claims while updating the list of claims. It advised the RP and CoC to consider providing a copy of the resolution plan to eligible parties, subject to the final outcome of the pending Supreme Court decision.

Treatment of contingent claims:
The Tribunal discussed the issue of contingent claims, particularly in the case of Enercon GmBh, whose claim was considered contingent due to its pending status before the Supreme Court. The Tribunal highlighted the need for careful consideration and compliance with legal requirements regarding such claims.

Adjudicatory power of Resolution Professional:
The Tribunal clarified that the RP does not possess adjudicatory power and must include disputed claims while updating claim information. It stressed the importance of following legal guidelines and court decisions in handling claims during insolvency proceedings.

Providing a copy of resolution plan to operational creditors:
An operational creditor raised a point that resolution plans should be provided to other operational creditors as well, regardless of the value of their debts. The Tribunal noted this argument and advised the RP to consider providing copies of resolution plans to operational creditors in line with the Supreme Court decision.

Challenge to insolvency & Bankruptcy Code provisions:
The Tribunal mentioned a writ petition challenging certain provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, seeking to quash an approval of a resolution plan. Despite the petition, the Tribunal proceeded with the case, as there was no stay from the Supreme Court and a direction to continue the proceedings without delay.

In conclusion, the Tribunal scheduled a comprehensive hearing on all pending matters and urged the parties to complete their pleadings promptly.

---