Liquidation under Insolvency Code follows rejection of resolution plan, with liquidator appointed under the statutory framework.

Where the Committee of Creditors unanimously rejected the resolution plan and no approved plan remained for implementation, the statutory conditions for liquidation under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code were satisfied, and the corporate debtor was directed into liquidation. On appointment of the liquidator, the Tribunal held that, in the absence of written consent from the existing resolution professional, the appointment could proceed on the basis of the available consent of Mr. Debashish Nanda, who was appointed as liquidator. The liquidation process was therefore permitted to proceed under the statutory framework.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the corporate debtor was liable to be sent into liquidation under Section 33(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 after rejection of the resolution plan by the Committee of Creditors and failure of resolution; (ii) Whether a liquidator could be appointed in place of the existing resolution professional in the absence of written consent from the latter.

Issue (i): Whether the corporate debtor was liable to be sent into liquidation under Section 33(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 after rejection of the resolution plan by the Committee of Creditors and failure of resolution.

Analysis: The resolution process had progressed through the statutory stages, a resolution plan had been received and placed before the Committee of Creditors, and the plan was rejected by unanimous vote. No approved resolution plan survived for implementation. In such circumstances, the statutory basis for proceeding to liquidation stood satisfied.

Conclusion: The issue is answered in the affirmative and in favour of the petitioner; liquidation of the corporate debtor was ordered.

Issue (ii): Whether a liquidator could be appointed in place of the existing resolution professional in the absence of written consent from the latter.

Analysis: The record showed consent of Mr. Debashish Nanda to act as liquidator, while no written consent of the existing resolution professional was available for appointment as liquidator. The applicable provisions governing appointment of a liquidator permitted the Tribunal to act on the basis of the available consent and the absence of the resolution professional's written consent.

Conclusion: The issue is answered in the affirmative and in favour of the petitioner; Mr. Debashish Nanda was appointed as liquidator.

Final Conclusion: The application succeeded, the corporate debtor was directed into liquidation, and the liquidation process was to proceed under the statutory framework with the appointed liquidator.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the Committee of Creditors rejects the resolution plan and no resolution survives, liquidation under the Code follows, and the Tribunal may appoint a liquidator in accordance with the statutory appointment framework.

---