An approved resolution plan that fixes distribution to dissenting financial creditors under Section 30(2)(b) read with Section 53(1) remains binding once approved under Section 31, and the creditor is entitled to the higher of the plan amount or liquidation value. The CoC's commercial wisdom in approving a liquidation-value based distribution mechanism could not be revisited by the Monitoring Committee, whose role was confined to implementation. A later attempt by the Monitoring Committee to reduce the dissenting creditor's entitlement was held to be an impermissible modification of the approved plan. The reliance on India Resurgence ARC v. Amit Metaliks was rejected because the creditor was not seeking anything beyond the CoC-approved liquidation value.
An approved resolution plan that fixes distribution to dissenting financial creditors under Section 30(2)(b) read with Section 53(1) remains binding once approved under Section 31, and the creditor is entitled to the higher of the plan amount or liquidation value. The CoC's commercial wisdom in approving a liquidation-value based distribution mechanism could not be revisited by the Monitoring Committee, whose role was confined to implementation. A later attempt by the Monitoring Committee to reduce the dissenting creditor's entitlement was held to be an impermissible modification of the approved plan. The reliance on India Resurgence ARC v. Amit Metaliks was rejected because the creditor was not seeking anything beyond the CoC-approved liquidation value.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
