PPIRP time limit cannot be extended without express provision; expiry without a plan requires termination.

The PPIRP framework fixes completion within 120 days from the commencement date and contains no express provision for extension. Section 12 of the Insolvency Code was treated as inapplicable to PPIRP because Chapter III-A has its own scheme, including the consequence under Section 54P. Where no resolution plan is approved within the prescribed period, the resolution professional must seek termination, and the process cannot be enlarged by the Adjudicating Authority. On expiry of 120 days without approval of a plan, PPIRP is liable to terminate, and the corporate debtor is released from the process.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the period of Pre-Packaged Insolvency Resolution Process could be extended by 60 days in the absence of an express statutory provision. (ii) Whether, on expiry of 120 days without approval of any resolution plan, the Pre-Packaged Insolvency Resolution Process was liable to be terminated.

Issue (i): Whether the period of Pre-Packaged Insolvency Resolution Process could be extended by 60 days in the absence of an express statutory provision.

Analysis: The application sought extension of the PPIRP period beyond the statutory limit. Section 54D fixes completion of PPIRP within 120 days from the pre-packaged insolvency commencement date and contains no provision for extension. The provision instead directs that, where no resolution plan is approved within the prescribed time, the resolution professional must seek termination. Reliance placed on Section 12 of the Code was held inapplicable to PPIRP in view of the specific scheme of Chapter III-A and the operation of Section 54P.

Conclusion: The request for extension was not maintainable and was rejected.

Issue (ii): Whether, on expiry of 120 days without approval of any resolution plan, the Pre-Packaged Insolvency Resolution Process was liable to be terminated.

Analysis: The record showed that the 120-day period had expired and no resolution plan had been approved by the committee of creditors. Under Section 54D(3), the resolution professional was required to move for termination when no plan was approved within the stipulated period. The PPIRP scheme, including Sections 54K(11) and 54K(12), reinforced the mandatory consequence of termination where the process could not culminate in an approved plan within time.

Conclusion: The PPIRP was liable to be terminated and the corporate debtor was released from the rigour of the process.

Final Conclusion: The application for extension failed, and the insolvency process was brought to an end in accordance with the statutory framework governing PPIRP.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the PPIRP completes its statutory 120-day period without approval of a resolution plan, the Adjudicating Authority cannot enlarge time in the absence of an express enabling provision, and termination follows as the mandated statutory consequence.

---