NCLAT dismisses appeal for CIRP extension beyond 330 days, upholds liquidation order following Essar Steels precedent

NCLAT Chennai dismissed an appeal seeking extension of CIRP beyond 330 days. The CoC had previously extended the period multiple times but rejected two resolution plans with 91.92% majority vote after the 330-day limit expired. The tribunal found no substance in appellant's arguments as no resolution plan or Section 12A application was pending. Following Supreme Court precedent in Essar Steels, the tribunal held that CIRP cannot be extended on flimsy grounds beyond 330 days. The adjudicating authority's dismissal of extension applications and order for corporate debtor's liquidation was upheld.

---

---

Issues involved: Appeal against order dismissing extension of CIRP period and allowing liquidation of Corporate Debtor.

Summary:
1. The appeal was filed by the Promoter and erstwhile Director of a company, challenging the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority dismissing the applications seeking extension of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) period beyond 330 days and allowing liquidation of the Corporate Debtor.

2. The CIRP proceedings for the Corporate Debtor were initiated on a specific date, and various orders were passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) in response to appeals and applications filed during the process.

3. The Resolution Professional (RP) filed multiple applications seeking extension of the CIRP period, but the Committee of Creditors (CoC) did not approve any resolution plans, leading to the RP filing an application for liquidation of the Corporate Debtor.

4. The Adjudicating Authority, considering legal precedents and the absence of pending resolution plans or Section 12A applications, held that the CIRP must be completed within 330 days unless exceptional circumstances exist. The applications for extension were dismissed, and the liquidation order was allowed.

5. The Appellant's argument regarding a pending extension application was refuted, emphasizing that the CoC had already rejected two resolution plans, and no further plans were pending for consideration.

6. The NCLAT upheld the Adjudicating Authority's decision, stating that the RP's actions did not warrant further extension of the CIRP period beyond 330 days, as per legal guidelines and the specific circumstances of the case.

7. The appeal was dismissed, with no costs imposed, as the Tribunal found no merit in challenging the orders of the Adjudicating Authority regarding the CIRP extension and liquidation of the Corporate Debtor.

---