Liquidation under the Insolvency Code prevails when no resolution plan is approved and creditors validly choose liquidation.

Where no resolution plan is approved within the CIRP period and the committee of creditors validly resolves to liquidate the corporate debtor with full voting support, Section 33 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code requires the Adjudicating Authority to pass a liquidation order. The time-bound insolvency framework and the commercial wisdom of the committee of creditors limit judicial interference, except where there is non-compliance with Section 30(2). On those facts, interference with the liquidation order was not warranted and the order was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the liquidation order could be interfered with when no resolution plan was approved within the CIRP period and the committee of creditors had resolved to liquidate the corporate debtor.

Analysis: No resolution plan had been approved before expiry of the CIRP period. The committee of creditors had approved liquidation with 100% voting share, and the statutory scheme under Section 33 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 required the Adjudicating Authority to pass a liquidation order in such circumstances. The time-bound nature of insolvency resolution and the primacy of the commercial wisdom of the committee of creditors limited judicial interference, absent non-compliance with Section 30(2) of the Code.

Conclusion: The liquidation order was upheld and no interference was warranted.

Ratio Decidendi: Where no resolution plan is approved within the prescribed CIRP period and the committee of creditors validly resolves to liquidate, the Adjudicating Authority must act under Section 33 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and appellate interference is confined to legally recognised limits.

---