Liquidation after failed CIRP and rejected belated resolution bid: late participation cannot be forced on the Committee of Creditors.

Where the CIRP had run its course, no resolution plan was approved within time, and the sole resolution applicant withdrew, the statutory conditions for liquidation under section 33(1)(a) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code were treated as satisfied. The resolution professional was appointed as liquidator under section 34(1), and the liquidation process was to proceed under the Code and regulations. A person who had not participated within the CIRP timeline was not entitled to compel the Committee of Creditors to consider a belated expression of interest or resolution proposal after expiry of the process. The document thus records liquidation of the corporate debtor and rejection of the late applicant's request.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the corporate debtor was liable to be put into liquidation under section 33(1)(a) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 on failure of the resolution process; (ii) Whether a person who had not participated within the CIRP timeline could seek a direction to place its expression of interest or proposed resolution plan before the Committee of Creditors.

Issue (i): Whether the corporate debtor was liable to be put into liquidation under section 33(1)(a) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 on failure of the resolution process.

Analysis: The resolution process had run its course, the only resolution applicant withdrew its plan, and no resolution plan stood approved within the permitted time. In such a situation, the statutory conditions for liquidation under section 33(1)(a) were satisfied. The resolution professional was also fit to be appointed as liquidator under section 34(1), and the ancillary directions relating to liquidation followed the liquidation framework under the Code and the regulations.

Conclusion: The corporate debtor was directed to be liquidated, and the resolution professional was appointed as liquidator.

Issue (ii): Whether a person who had not participated within the CIRP timeline could seek a direction to place its expression of interest or proposed resolution plan before the Committee of Creditors.

Analysis: The applicant approached the resolution professional after the CIRP period had already ended and had not been part of the resolution process within the prescribed time. Once the CIRP timeline had expired, and especially after the resolution applicant had withdrawn, there was no basis to compel consideration of a fresh proposal from a stranger to the process. The commercial domain of the Committee of Creditors could not be extended by directing consideration of a belated bid.

Conclusion: The request for directions to consider the applicant's belated proposal was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The order resulted in liquidation of the corporate debtor while declining relief to the belated applicant seeking participation in the resolution process.

Ratio Decidendi: Once the CIRP period has expired and no resolution plan survives for approval, liquidation follows under section 33(1)(a), and the adjudicating authority cannot direct the Committee of Creditors to consider a resolution plan of a person who was not part of the CIRP within time.

---