Tribunal upholds Committee of Creditors' decision to liquidate Corporate Debtor

The Tribunal dismissed the Applicant's request to keep the liquidation application in abeyance, upholding the Committee of Creditors' decision to liquidate the Corporate Debtor. Emphasizing the CoC's commercial wisdom, the Tribunal highlighted that the Applicant's proposals did not meet the necessary criteria and reiterated the non-justiciability of the CoC's decisions. The Applicant was advised to adhere to the CoC's resolution and could potentially propose a revival scheme during the liquidation process, subject to statutory requirements.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Request to keep the liquidation application in abeyance.
2. Alleged non-cooperation and altercation between the Applicant and the Resolution Professional (RP).
3. Proposal for settlement of debts by the Applicant.
4. Decision of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) to liquidate the Corporate Debtor.
5. Judicial discretion and commercial wisdom of the CoC.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Request to keep the liquidation application in abeyance:
The Applicant sought to keep the liquidation application in abeyance pending the disposal of the instant application. The Tribunal noted that the liquidation application was based on a resolution passed by the CoC and had been reserved for orders. The Tribunal ultimately dismissed the Applicant's request, emphasizing that the CoC's decision to liquidate was made after due deliberations and voting.

2. Alleged non-cooperation and altercation between the Applicant and the RP:
The Applicant alleged non-cooperation from the RP and filed a complaint with the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI), which was rejected. The RP, in turn, filed an application alleging non-cooperation from the Applicant, which was pending adjudication. The Tribunal noted these contentions but did not find them sufficient to halt the liquidation process.

3. Proposal for settlement of debts by the Applicant:
The Applicant proposed a settlement plan for the Financial Creditors, detailing specific amounts and timelines for payment. The Tribunal observed that the Applicant had not put forth any concrete proposal before the 2nd Respondent, a Financial Creditor. The Tribunal referred to the decision in Abhishek Aggarwal -Vs- Mr. Alok Kumar Agarwal & Ors., emphasizing that the CoC's decision to liquidate must be adhered to when approved by the requisite majority.

4. Decision of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) to liquidate the Corporate Debtor:
The CoC, with 87.57% votes, decided to liquidate the Corporate Debtor. The Tribunal highlighted the legislative intent and judicial precedence that prioritize the commercial wisdom of the CoC. The Tribunal referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Mr. K. Sasidharan -Vs- Indian Overseas Bank, which underscored that the Adjudicating Authority does not have the jurisdiction to analyze or evaluate the commercial decisions of the CoC.

5. Judicial discretion and commercial wisdom of the CoC:
The Applicant argued for the Tribunal to exercise its discretionary power under Rule 11 of NCLT Rules, 2016, to grant time for settlement. The Tribunal referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Limited -Vs- Satish Kumar Gupta & Ors., which established that the commercial wisdom of the CoC must prevail and is non-justiciable. The Tribunal concluded that it could not interfere with the CoC's decision, which was a collective business judgment.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed the Applicant's application, affirming the CoC's decision to liquidate the Corporate Debtor. The Tribunal emphasized the paramount status of the CoC's commercial wisdom and noted that the Applicant could still propose a revival scheme during the liquidation process, subject to eligibility under Section 29A of the IBC, 2016.

---