Tribunal Upholds CoC's Resolution Plan Approval; Dismisses Higher Offer, Redirects Grievances to Adjudicating Authority.

The Tribunal dismissed the Interlocutory Application regarding the opportunity to meet the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, advising the Applicant to approach the Adjudicating Authority for grievances. The CoC's approval of the Resolution Plan was upheld, despite the Applicant's higher offer, with the Tribunal directing any further applications to the Adjudicating Authority. The Contempt Case was closed after the Applicant's Counsel expressed no desire to pursue it further. The Tribunal underscored adherence to legal procedures and the Adjudicating Authority's role in resolving issues.

---

---

Issues:
1. Interlocutory Application regarding the opportunity to meet the Chairman-cum-Managing Director.
2. Approval of Resolution Plan by the Committee of Creditors (CoC).
3. Higher offer made by the Applicant compared to the Successful Resolution Applicant.
4. Contempt Case closure.

Interlocutory Application regarding opportunity to meet the Chairman-cum-Managing Director:
The Interlocutory Application was filed by the Appellant concerning a disposed Company Appeal. The Appellant claimed they were not given the opportunity to meet the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, who is the Competent Authority for considering the proposal. The Tribunal had made necessary clarifications in a previous order. The Bank's Counsel stated that all steps were taken by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) as per the Tribunal's orders. The Applicant's Counsel mentioned efforts made post a specific date to meet the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, but without success. The Tribunal suggested the Applicant could approach the Adjudicating Authority with any grievances, and the Applicant could present their plea before the Authority.

Approval of Resolution Plan by the Committee of Creditors (CoC):
The CoC had already approved the Resolution Plan during the pendency of the Application. The Applicant's Counsel highlighted that the Applicant was offering a higher amount than the Successful Resolution Applicant. The Tribunal noted that no case was made out to issue further orders on the Application, emphasizing that any future Application by the Applicant would be considered by the Adjudicating Authority in accordance with the law.

Higher offer made by the Applicant compared to the Successful Resolution Applicant:
The Applicant expressed their intention to offer a higher amount than the Successful Resolution Applicant whose plan had been approved by the CoC. The Tribunal acknowledged this but reiterated that any further action or plea by the Applicant should be presented before the Adjudicating Authority for proper consideration.

Contempt Case closure:
In the Contempt Case, the Applicant's Counsel stated they did not wish to pursue the application, leading to the closure of the Contempt Application by the Tribunal.

This judgment addressed various aspects, including the opportunity to meet the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, the approval of the Resolution Plan by the CoC, the higher offer made by the Applicant, and the closure of the Contempt Case. The Tribunal emphasized the proper legal procedures and the role of the Adjudicating Authority in addressing any grievances or future applications effectively.

---