CIRP time exclusion requires Committee of Creditors support; a financial creditor cannot seek it alone.

Time excluded from the corporate insolvency resolution process cannot be sought by a financial creditor alone under section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code where the Committee of Creditors has not resolved to seek such relief. The request based on revival of mining leases and pendency of a challenge to the resolution professional's admission of claims was found insufficient by itself, particularly since no resolution plan had been filed even during the extended period and the statutory role of the Committee of Creditors under section 28 had not been invoked for the decision. The exclusion request was therefore rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the period sought could be excluded from the corporate insolvency resolution process at the instance of a financial creditor when the Committee of Creditors had not taken any decision to seek such exclusion.

Analysis: The relief was sought under section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 on the ground that revival of the mining leases and pendency of a challenge to the resolution professional's admission of claims justified exclusion of time. The request was not supported by any resolution of the Committee of Creditors. The order held that the pendency of the interlocutory application and the delay in renewal of the mining leases were not sufficient grounds by themselves to exclude time from the CIRP, especially when no resolution plan had been filed even during the extended period and the statutory role of the Committee of Creditors under section 28 had not been invoked for such a decision.

Conclusion: The request for exclusion of CIRP time was not maintainable at the instance of the financial creditor alone and was rejected.

---