Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Challenge to an approved Resolution Plan where no consideration was given to payment to an Operational Creditor. The key points are: Section 30(2)(b) mandates that payment to Operational Creditors shall not be less than the amount payable in case of liquidation u/s 53. The Supreme Court in Essar Steel case held that the CoC's commercial wisdom in approving a Resolution Plan cannot be interfered with as long as Code provisions are met. The Adjudicating Authority's jurisdiction is circumscribed by Section 30(2). In the present case, notionally computing the amount payable to the Operational Creditor in liquidation results in nil, as the sole Financial Creditor itself cannot receive its full amount. The approved Resolution Plan proposes payment to the Financial Creditor and CIRP costs, complying with Section 30(2)(b). Though non-payment to Operational Creditors is harsh, courts are bound by the current law until the legislature amends it. The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the Adjudicating Authority's order approving the Resolution Plan.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
