Tribunal orders fair distribution of success fee among creditors, emphasizing equity and legal compliance.

The Tribunal dismissed the challenge against the altered distribution matrix but found the success fee for the Resolution Professional unreasonable. The Tribunal directed the equitable distribution of the success fee among employees, operational creditors, and unsecured creditors, emphasizing fairness. The application was partially allowed, highlighting the importance of adhering to legal provisions and ensuring equitable treatment of creditors.

---

---

Issues:
1. Alleged unilateral alteration of distribution matrix by the Respondent during the Committee of Creditors meeting.
2. Approval of success fee for the Resolution Professional by the Committee of Creditors without consent.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Alleged Unilateral Alteration of Distribution Matrix
The applicant filed an application seeking to challenge the Respondent's conduct during the adjourned 20th meeting of the Committee of Creditors. The applicant alleged that the Respondent unilaterally altered the distribution matrix post the applicant's departure from the meeting. The applicant contended that the Respondent's actions were in violation of the prevalent law, as the right to determine the distribution pattern lies with the CoC members. The applicant emphasized that the distribution matrix was changed to benefit specific entities, breaching the fiduciary duty owed to the CoC members. The applicant sought the Tribunal to reject the altered distribution matrix and reconvene the CoC meeting for proper consideration.

Issue 2: Approval of Success Fee
The applicant challenged the approval of a success fee of Rs. 3 Crores to the Resolution Professional (RP) by the CoC, alleging it to be illegal and inequitable. The applicant argued that the Insolvency Code does not provide for a "Success Fee" in addition to the RP's professional fees. Moreover, the applicant, an unsecured creditor, highlighted the substantial reduction in their claim under the approved plan, questioning the justification for the success fee. The applicant contended that the RP's actions in approving the success fee without the CoC's consent and altering the distribution matrix post-vote were indicative of a breach of fiduciary duties and a disregard for the Code's provisions.

Tribunal's Findings and Judgment
After hearing both parties and reviewing the submissions, the Tribunal noted that the CoC had unanimously approved the Resolution Plan submitted by Prestige Estates Projects Ltd. However, the Tribunal found the success fee awarded to the RP to be unreasonable, citing a precedent judgment. Consequently, the Tribunal directed the proportional distribution of the Rs. 3 Crores among employees, operational creditors, and unsecured creditors, as justified in the previous order. As a result, the Tribunal dismissed the application's prayer regarding the distribution matrix but allowed the prayer challenging the success fee. The application was partially allowed and disposed of accordingly, with the Tribunal emphasizing the equitable distribution of the success fee among the creditors.

This detailed analysis encapsulates the core issues, arguments presented by both parties, and the Tribunal's findings and judgment in a comprehensive manner, preserving the legal nuances and key points from the original judgment.

---