Tribunal Upholds Committee of Creditors' Decision on Resolution Plan with Emphasis on Non-Justiciability

The Tribunal upheld the approval of the Resolution Plan by the Committee of Creditors, emphasizing the non-justiciability of the commercial wisdom of the Committee's decisions. The rejection of the settlement proposal by the Adjudicating Authority was deemed proper, with the Tribunal stating its limited jurisdiction in reviewing such decisions. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, highlighting that the impugned orders were in accordance with legal principles, and reiterated that the business decisions of the Committee of Creditors are beyond judicial review.

---

---

Issues involved:
1. Approval of Resolution Plan by Committee of Creditors
2. Rejection of settlement proposal by Adjudicating Authority
3. Compliance with Section 30 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016
4. Judicial review of business decisions of Committee of Creditors

Analysis:

Approval of Resolution Plan by Committee of Creditors:
The Resolution Plan submitted by 'Sterlite Power Transmission Ltd.' (SPTL) was approved by 95.15% of the voting share of the Committee of Creditors and further endorsed by the Adjudicating Authority. The appellant's application to direct the Committee of Creditors to consider a settlement proposal was rejected since the settlement proposal was already declined by the Committee of Creditors with the necessary majority. The appellant challenged both orders, leading to the appeal.

Rejection of settlement proposal by Adjudicating Authority:
The Adjudicating Authority was criticized for allegedly failing to assess whether the approved Resolution Plan complied with Section 30 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and its objective of maximizing the value of the Corporate Debtor's assets. The orders were also challenged as being non-speaking cryptic orders without proper application of mind.

Compliance with Section 30 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016:
The Tribunal emphasized that the business decisions of the Committee of Creditors are beyond judicial review, citing legal precedents. The scope of the Tribunal's review is limited to specific grounds, excluding questioning the commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors. The Tribunal clarified that its jurisdiction is restricted and does not extend to reconsidering rejected settlement proposals or challenging the decisions made by the majority of the Committee of Creditors.

Judicial review of business decisions of Committee of Creditors:
Legal precedents, including 'K. Sashidhar vs. Indian Overseas Bank' and 'Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Limited Vs. Satish Kumar Gupta and Others,' were referenced to support the principle that the commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors in approving or rejecting a resolution plan is non-justiciable. The Tribunal highlighted that the Adjudicating Authority's scrutiny is limited to the Resolution Plan approved by the requisite majority of Financial Creditors and does not extend to questioning the Committee of Creditors' business decisions.

In conclusion, the Tribunal found that the impugned orders were passed after due consideration and aligned with established legal principles. The appeals were dismissed, emphasizing that the commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors is not subject to judicial review.

---