Publication objections in CIRP rejected where newspaper publication was proved and late challenge to resolution plan stage was not entertainable.

Allegations that the public announcement and Form G were not properly published during CIRP were rejected because the record showed publication in Mumbai newspapers and production of the original Udaipur editions containing the announcement and Form G. The Tribunal noted the distinction between e-newspaper and physical publication and recorded that no English newspaper was published in Udaipur, so the objection lacked support. It further held that repeated objections raised only when approval of the resolution plan had already been reserved for orders could not be entertained, so the application was not maintainable at that stage.

---

---

Issues: Whether the allegations challenging the public announcement and publication of Form G during the CIRP were tenable and whether the application, filed at the stage when the resolution plan approval matter was reserved for orders, could be entertained.

Analysis: The application was founded on alleged non-publication or improper publication of the public announcement and Form G. The record showed publication of the public announcement in Mumbai newspapers and the original Udaipur editions of the regional newspaper containing the public announcement and Form G were produced before the Tribunal. The Tribunal also noted the distinction between e-newspaper and physical publication and observed that there was no English newspaper published in Udaipur. In these circumstances, the allegations were found to be unsupported. The Tribunal further held that repeated objections to the approval of the resolution plan at that stage could not be entertained.

Conclusion: The challenge to the publication process was rejected and the application was held not entertainable.

---