Liquidation value must follow the fixed cut-off date in a restructuring plan, and later recomputation was rejected.

The restructuring framework required liquidation value to be aligned with the fixed cut-off date for the resolution process, and the plan, once approved by the requisite lender majority, bound all lenders. Because liquidation value had already been computed and communicated, and the earlier order had fixed 15.10.2018 as the relevant cut-off date, the value determined on 30.09.2018 was treated as consistent with the governing process. The request for recomputation on a later date had no basis in the applicable framework, so the challenge to the date and basis of liquidation value computation was rejected and the adopted valuation was upheld.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the liquidation value for the restructuring plan had to be determined with reference to a later date as claimed by the applicant, instead of the cut-off date already fixed in the proceedings.

Analysis: The relevant framework required the resolution plan to be implemented within the prescribed timeline and provided that the plan, once approved by the requisite majority of lenders, would bind all lenders. The inter-creditor arrangement contemplated communication of liquidation value along with the resolution plan, and the record showed that liquidation value had already been worked out and conveyed. The earlier order had accepted 15.10.2018 as the cut-off date for the resolution process, and the liquidation value fixed on 30.09.2018 was held to be consistent with that date. The applicant's request for a fresh computation as on a later date was found to have no basis in the governing framework.

Conclusion: The challenge to the date and basis of computation of liquidation value was rejected, and the liquidation value already adopted for the restructuring plan was upheld.

Final Conclusion: The restructuring arrangement based on the previously fixed cut-off date and the corresponding liquidation value was allowed to stand, and the applications were not entertained on merits to the extent they sought contrary relief.

---