Tribunal extends CIRP period, emphasizes resolution plans to avoid liquidation, and maximize asset value The Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the Adjudicating Authority's order and extending the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) period ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Tribunal extends CIRP period, emphasizes resolution plans to avoid liquidation, and maximize asset value
The Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the Adjudicating Authority's order and extending the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) period until November 30, 2021. The extension was granted due to exceptional circumstances, including interruptions caused by a stay order and the COVID-19 pandemic. Emphasizing the avoidance of liquidation, the Tribunal highlighted the need to consider resolution plans from prospective applicants. The decision aimed to maximize the value of the corporate debtor's assets and ensure the continuation of business operations.
Issues Involved: 1. Exclusion and extension of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) period. 2. Exceptional circumstances justifying the extension of the CIRP period. 3. Compliance with the timelines prescribed under Section 12 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016. 4. Consideration of resolution plans submitted by prospective resolution applicants. 5. Avoidance of liquidation as a last resort.
Detailed Analysis:
1. Exclusion and Extension of the CIRP Period: The appeal was filed against the order dated August 3, 2021, by the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT, Chennai), which did not grant the relief sought for exclusion of 165 days and extension of the CIRP period by another 15 days, totaling 180 days. The appellant, the resolution professional of the corporate debtor, argued that the CIRP faced interruptions due to a stay order by the Madras High Court and the nationwide lockdown due to COVID-19.
2. Exceptional Circumstances Justifying the Extension: The appellant highlighted several exceptional circumstances, including: - The CIRP was stayed by the Madras High Court and later disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. - The first expression of interest received only one resolution plan, which was rejected by the CoC. - The transition of resolution professionals was delayed due to COVID-19. - The corporate debtor is in the healthcare industry, with significant contributions from over 200 doctors and 2,000 staff during the pandemic.
3. Compliance with Timelines Under Section 12 of IBC, 2016: The appellant cited the Supreme Court's decision in Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Ltd. v. Satish Kumar Gupta, which held that in exceptional circumstances, the time for completing the CIRP can be extended beyond the outer limit of 330 days. The Supreme Court struck down the word "mandatorily" from the proviso to Section 12(3) of the IBC, recognizing the need for flexibility in exceptional cases.
4. Consideration of Resolution Plans Submitted by Prospective Resolution Applicants: The applications by Max Vision Eye Hospitals P. Ltd. and ASG Hospitals P. Ltd. sought consideration of their resolution plans submitted within the prescribed timelines. The Tribunal noted that the corporate debtor received significant interest from prospective resolution applicants, with seven shortlisted bidders expected to submit their plans by September 13, 2021.
5. Avoidance of Liquidation as a Last Resort: The Tribunal emphasized the object of the IBC, which is to ensure the revival and continuation of the corporate debtor rather than liquidation. The Supreme Court's judgment in Swiss Ribbons P. Ltd. v. Union of India underscored the importance of maximizing the value of the corporate debtor's assets and avoiding liquidation unless no viable resolution plans are available.
Conclusion: The Tribunal concluded that the appellants demonstrated exceptional circumstances justifying the extension of the CIRP period. The Tribunal set aside the Adjudicating Authority's order dated August 3, 2021, and extended the time for completing the CIRP until November 30, 2021. The time spent in filing the appeals was also excluded. The Tribunal reiterated that liquidation should be a last resort, and the extension was necessary to consider the resolution plans submitted by prospective applicants. The appeals were allowed, and all pending applications were disposed of accordingly.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.