Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the order directing liquidation of the corporate debtor was liable to be set aside on the ground that no approved resolution plan existed and that the committee of creditors could still act on a later acceptance conveyed by one financial creditor.
Analysis: The CIRP had expired without any resolution plan being approved by the committee of creditors within the statutory period. The later email from one financial creditor did not amount to approval by the committee of creditors, since the modified plan was never resubmitted, examined, certified, or put to a valid vote in accordance with the Code and the regulations. Once the CIRP period had lapsed, the committee of creditors had become functus officio, and the withdrawal of interest by the sole resolution applicant meant that no surviving basis remained for seeking further extension of CIRP time. In these circumstances, the adjudicating authority was justified in proceeding under Section 33(1)(a) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
Conclusion: The challenge to the liquidation order failed. The liquidation direction was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.
Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of a duly approved resolution plan within the CIRP period, a later bilateral indication from a creditor does not amount to CoC approval, and upon expiry of the CIRP the adjudicating authority may order liquidation under Section 33(1)(a) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.