TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court dismisses Civil Appeal for non-compliance with Resolution Plan, emphasizing timely compliance in insolvency.</h1> <h3>Kridhan Infrastructure Pvt Ltd (Now known as Krish Steel and Trading Pvt Ltd) Versus Venkatesan Sankaranarayan & Ors</h3> Kridhan Infrastructure Pvt Ltd (Now known as Krish Steel and Trading Pvt Ltd) Versus Venkatesan Sankaranarayan & Ors - [2021] 225 Comp Cas 694 (SC) Issues:1. Failure to implement Resolution Plan leading to liquidation.2. Appellant's non-compliance with deposit obligations.3. Request for altering company status from liquidation to active.4. Inability to raise funds due to company status.5. Court's decision on appellant's failure to comply with terms.Issue 1: Failure to implement Resolution Plan leading to liquidationThe appellant submitted a Resolution Plan for a company undergoing Corporate insolvency Resolution Process under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016. Despite approval, the appellant failed to fulfill obligations, leading to liquidation as CoC voted for it due to non-implementation of the Plan. NCLAT noted the appellant's failure for over eight months and declined to exercise jurisdiction under Rule 11 of NCLAT Rules, 2016.Issue 2: Appellant's non-compliance with deposit obligationsDespite various opportunities, the appellant did not fulfill its obligations under the Resolution Plan, including equity infusion, after depositing an initial amount in an Escrow Account. The appellant agreed to deposit a specific amount within a timeframe but failed to comply, resulting in liquidation proceedings.Issue 3: Request for altering company status from liquidation to activeThe appellant sought a change in the company status from liquidation to active to secure funds from Term Lenders. However, the Term Lenders insisted on the status change before providing finance, causing a delay in fund availability and hindering compliance with the Resolution Plan terms.Issue 4: Inability to raise funds due to company statusThe appellant faced challenges in raising funds as Term Lenders required a change in the company status from liquidation to active before providing finance. Despite efforts to secure funds through a mortgage on company assets, the inability to alter the company status hindered fund availability.Issue 5: Court's decision on appellant's failure to comply with termsThe Court observed the appellant's failure to raise funds within the specified timeframe despite multiple opportunities. Emphasizing the importance of timely compliance under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, the Court dismissed the Civil Appeal due to the appellant's persistent non-compliance with the Resolution Plan terms, leading to the forfeiture of the deposited amount and the management reverting to the liquidator as per law.In conclusion, the judgment highlighted the significance of adhering to Resolution Plan terms, timely compliance, and the consequences of persistent non-compliance in insolvency proceedings.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
