Challenge to Resolution Plan Approval Dismissed in Insolvency Case

The Tribunal dismissed the challenge to the approval of the Resolution Plan submitted by the 3rd Respondent in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. The Tribunal held that the Appellant, ranking 6th among the Resolution Applicants, had no right to renegotiate post-submission and that the evaluation process was fair. Citing settled law, the Tribunal upheld the Committee of Creditors' authority in evaluating Resolution Plans. The challenge did not meet the limited grounds for contesting an approved Resolution Plan under Section 61(3) of the law. Consequently, both appeals were dismissed, and the Resolution Plan approval was upheld.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to approval of Resolution Plan by Adjudicating Authority.

Analysis:
The Appellant, a Resolution Applicant, challenged the approval of the Resolution Plan submitted by the 3rd Respondent in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process of the Corporate Debtor. The Appellant claimed that despite ranking 6th among the Resolution Applicants, it sought to negotiate and enhance its bid after being denied an opportunity to present before the Committee of Creditors. The Appellant contended that the evaluation process lacked transparency and the Resolution Professional did not consider its revised proposal adequately. The Appellant argued that a revised plan should be accepted if it surpasses the amount offered by the top-ranked Resolution Applicant in the interest of stakeholders.

The Resolution Professional defended the process, stating that the Appellant's delayed Expression of Interest was considered due to its potential and financial capability. The Resolution Plan evaluation criteria specified negotiation only with the top three Resolution Applicants, where the Appellant ranked 6th. The Resolution Professional and the 3rd Respondent argued against the Appellant's right to renegotiate post-submission of the Resolution Plan, citing settled law that Resolution Applicants have no such right.

The Tribunal referenced the Supreme Court's decision in Essar Steel India Ltd. v. Satish Kumar Gupta, emphasizing the Committee of Creditors' competence in evaluating commercial aspects of a Resolution Plan. The Tribunal highlighted the limited grounds for challenging an approved Resolution Plan under Section 61(3) of the law, which were not met in this case. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed both appeals, upholding the approval of the Resolution Plan submitted by the 3rd Respondent. No costs were awarded in the matter.

---