Creditor participation and RBI restructuring framework can bar winding up when revival and collective lender interests dominate.

In a winding-up petition, the Court permitted intervention by a consortium lender at the admission stage, holding that creditors' wishes may be considered where their interests are materially affected. It also held that RBI circulars on Joint Lenders' Forum and Corrective Action Plan had statutory force and bound banking companies, requiring lenders to pursue the restructuring framework before recovery action. Given the overwhelming opposition of creditors by value, ongoing restructuring, and the revival prospects of the company, the Court found winding up to be a discretionary remedy that should not be used where it would frustrate collective creditor interests. The petition was therefore dismissed.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the consortium lender could intervene and be heard at the admission stage of the winding-up petition; (ii) whether the Reserve Bank of India circulars on Joint Lenders' Forum and Corrective Action Plan were binding on the petitioner bank; and (iii) whether, in view of the creditors' opposition and ongoing restructuring efforts, the winding-up petition should be admitted or dismissed.

Issue (i): whether the consortium lender could intervene and be heard at the admission stage of the winding-up petition.

Analysis: The Court applied the principle that, in matters relating to winding up, the wishes of creditors may be considered even at the admission stage. It relied on the statutory recognition of creditors' participation and on precedents holding that secured creditors and other stakeholders may be heard before admission where their interests are materially affected. The intervention sought by the consortium leader represented a large body of lenders and was connected with an active restructuring process.

Conclusion: The intervention application was maintainable and the consortium lender was permitted to intervene at the admission stage.

Issue (ii): whether the Reserve Bank of India circulars on Joint Lenders' Forum and Corrective Action Plan were binding on the petitioner bank.

Analysis: The Court held that the circulars issued by the Reserve Bank of India under the Banking Regulation Act had statutory force and bound all banking companies. It further held that formation of the Joint Lenders' Forum was mandatory once the account was classified as SMA-2 and the exposure threshold was met. The Court read the circulars as requiring the lenders to explore rectification and restructuring through the forum before resorting to recovery, and rejected the argument that the petitioner could ignore the framework merely because it had not signed the later inter-creditor or debtor-creditor agreements.

Conclusion: The RBI circulars were binding on the petitioner bank and the petitioner could not bypass the Joint Lenders' Forum framework while restructuring was under consideration.

Issue (iii): whether, in view of the creditors' opposition and ongoing restructuring efforts, the winding-up petition should be admitted or dismissed.

Analysis: The Court considered that the vast majority of creditors by value opposed winding up and were participating in a restructuring process aimed at revival of the company. It held that winding up is a discretionary remedy and that a creditor's petition should not be entertained if it would not benefit the petitioner or the creditors generally. The Court also treated the company's operational scale, continuing business, and restructuring efforts as relevant factors against a winding-up order. In these circumstances, allowing the petitioner to pursue winding up would adversely affect the revival process and the interests of the wider body of creditors.

Conclusion: The winding-up petition was not admitted and was dismissed.

Final Conclusion: The Court upheld creditor participation at the admission stage, treated the RBI's restructuring framework as binding, and declined to wind up the company because the collective creditor interest and revival prospects outweighed the petitioning creditor's claim.

Ratio Decidendi: In a winding-up petition, the Court may consider the wishes of creditors at the admission stage, and where a statutory lender-restructuring framework is operative and supported by the overwhelming body of creditors, a winding-up petition may be refused if it would frustrate revival and not benefit creditors generally.

---