Tribunal upholds Resolution Plan approval in face of objections, affirming majority rule.

The Tribunal dismissed the Appeal challenging the approval of the Resolution Plan by the Adjudicating Authority. The Resolution Plan, approved by 99.97% of the Committee of Creditors, faced objections from the Appellant not part of the CoC. The Tribunal rejected the addition of 35 homebuyers/Financial Creditors in a class on record due to lack of voting on the Plan. The Appeal's arguments regarding project-wise voting, procedural violations, and rights of financial creditors' representatives were addressed, affirming the binding nature of the majority decision. The Resolution Plan's clauses aimed at protecting homebuyers' interests were deemed just, leading to the dismissal of the Appeal.

---

---

Issues:
1. Approval of Resolution Plan by Adjudicating Authority
2. Addition of homebuyers/Financial Creditors in a class on the record
3. Conduct of voting project-wise
4. Procedural violations by Resolution Professional and Authorised Representative
5. Rights and duties of authorised representative of financial creditors
6. Binding nature of voting share of financial creditors
7. Clauses of the Resolution Plan for Project Earth Copia, Project Earth Sapphire Court, and Project Earth Techone

Analysis:

1. The Appeal challenges the approval of the Resolution Plan by the Adjudicating Authority. The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) commenced against the Corporate Debtor, and the Resolution Plan was approved by 99.97% votes of the Committee of Creditors (CoC). The Appellant, not a member of the CoC, raised objections regarding the approval process.

2. An application was filed to add 35 homebuyers/Financial Creditors in a class on record. The Respondents objected, stating that 29 out of 35 did not vote on the Resolution Plan. The Respondents argued that the Appeal should not be entertained by the Tribunal.

3. The Appellant argued that voting on the Resolution Plan should have been conducted project-wise, highlighting procedural violations by the Resolution Professional and Authorised Representative. The Resolution Professional and Successful Resolution Applicant contended that the majority of homebuyers approved the plan, and procedural violations were denied.

4. The rights and duties of the authorised representative of financial creditors were discussed, emphasizing the binding nature of the voting share of financial creditors. The Supreme Court's decision in a related case was cited to support the argument that the minority of homebuyers must abide by the majority decision.

5. The clauses of the Resolution Plan for various projects were examined, focusing on satisfying admitted claims by completing pending construction activities and handing over possession to allottees. The clauses aimed to protect the interests of homebuyers-allottees and were deemed to do substantial justice.

6. The Tribunal concluded that the Resolution Plan adequately protected the interests of homebuyers, and no sufficient grounds were presented to interfere with the order approving the Resolution Plan. Therefore, the Appeal was dismissed based on the detailed analysis of the issues raised.

---