Resolution plan revised, objectionable comments deleted, equal payment ordered, reprimand for lack of communication.

The appeal was allowed, directing the deletion of objectionable comments from the resolution plan, payment to the Appellant equal to the highest percentage paid to any operational creditor, and litigation costs of one lakh rupees. The Resolution Professional was reprimanded for failing to communicate the admitted claim amount and objectionable comments to the relevant parties. Compliance was mandated within 30 days.

---

---

Issues involved:
1. Treatment of the Appellant's claim in the resolution plan.
2. Eligibility of the Successful Resolution Applicant under section 29-A of the IBC.
3. Duty of the Resolution Professional in communicating the admitted claim amount and examining the resolution plan.

Summary:

Issue 1: Treatment of the Appellant's claim in the resolution plan
The Appellant challenged the approval of the resolution plan by the Adjudicating Authority, arguing that his claim, based on an arbitral award, was not considered in accordance with section 30(2)(b) of the IBC. The Appellant had disclosed the arbitral award and the pending section 34 application against it. Despite this, the Resolution Professional admitted only a part of the claim and failed to communicate the admitted amount to the Appellant. The Successful Resolution Applicant, represented by the same persons who were on the Board of Directors of the corporate debtor, made prejudicial remarks about the arbitral award in the resolution plan, which were not within their jurisdiction. The Tribunal found these comments objectionable and ordered their deletion from the resolution plan. The Appellant should be paid an amount equal to the highest percentage of payment made to any operational creditor in the resolution plan.

Issue 2: Eligibility of the Successful Resolution Applicant under section 29-A of the IBC
The Appellant argued that the Successful Resolution Applicant was ineligible under section 29-A of the IBC. However, the Tribunal noted that the corporate debtor was an MSME, and under section 240-A of the IBC, the provisions of clauses (c) and (h) of section 29-A do not apply to MSMEs. Therefore, the Successful Resolution Applicant was eligible to submit a resolution plan.

Issue 3: Duty of the Resolution Professional in communicating the admitted claim amount and examining the resolution plan
The Tribunal found that the Resolution Professional failed to communicate the precise quantum of the admitted claim to the Appellant and did not bring the objectionable comments in the resolution plan to the notice of the Committee of Creditors and the Adjudicating Authority. The Resolution Professional was reprimanded for this failure.

Conclusion:
The appeal was allowed with directions to delete the objectionable comments from the resolution plan, pay the Appellant an amount equal to the highest percentage of payment made to any operational creditor, and pay litigation costs of one lakh rupees to the Appellant. The Resolution Professional was directed to ensure compliance within 30 days.

---