Tribunal Orders Management Involvement in Resolution Plans; CoC Meeting Reconsideration

The Tribunal directed the Resolution Professional to provide the resolution plans to the suspended management, following legal principles outlined by the Supreme Court. A fresh Committee of Creditors (CoC) meeting was mandated for reconsideration, ensuring the participation of the suspended management in decision-making. Confidentiality undertakings were required, and any further objections were to be addressed. Time spent on these proceedings was excluded from the resolution process timeline, with a two-week deadline for plan provision and CoC reconvening. A follow-up hearing was scheduled for monitoring compliance with the directives.

---

---

Issues:
1. Approval of the Resolution Plan under IBC, 2016
2. Objection by the suspended management regarding non-provision of resolution plan
3. Legal obligation to provide resolution plan to all participants, including the suspended management

Analysis:
1. The application under Section 30(6) of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 sought approval of the Resolution Plan submitted by Agarwal Real City Private Limited for the corporate debtor, Rajpal Abhikaran Private Limited. The Resolution Professional, Ms. Teena Saraswat Pandey, filed the application before the Tribunal.

2. The suspended management raised objections, citing non-receipt of the resolution plan during the Committee of Creditors (CoC) meetings. They argued that this omission violated the provisions of the Code, referring to a judgment by the Supreme Court in a similar matter.

3. The Tribunal acknowledged the legal requirement for providing all participants, including the suspended management, with copies of the resolution plan. Citing the Supreme Court's judgment, it emphasized the importance of ensuring that all relevant documents, including resolution plans, are shared with participants to enable informed discussions and decision-making.

4. The Resolution Professional responded to the objections, highlighting discussions in the CoC meetings regarding access to company data but failed to address the specific provision of the resolution plan to the suspended management.

5. In line with the legal principles outlined by the Supreme Court, the Tribunal directed the Resolution Professional to provide the resolution plans to the suspended management. It mandated a fresh CoC meeting to reconsider the plans, allowing the suspended management to participate in the decision-making process.

6. The Tribunal emphasized the need for confidentiality undertakings from the suspended management to maintain the sensitive nature of the information shared. It instructed the Resolution Professional and the CoC to address any other objections raised by the suspended management during the reconsideration process.

7. To ensure compliance and fairness, the Tribunal excluded the time spent on these proceedings from the resolution process timeline, following the precedent set in a previous judgment. It set a deadline of two weeks for the resolution plans to be provided to the suspended management and for the CoC to reconvene to make a fresh decision.

8. The Tribunal scheduled a follow-up hearing for the Resolution Professional to submit the minutes of the CoC meeting after providing the resolution plans to the suspended management, signaling a proactive approach to monitor and enforce compliance with the directives issued.

---