The NCLAT upheld approval of the resolution plan, applying limited judicial review and the CoC's commercial wisdom because no breach of Section 30(2) or material procedural irregularity was shown. Objections on CIRP costs failed since the plan treated unpaid costs as payable at actuals and, in any event, the issue had become academic after implementation. The EPF treatment was sustained because the plan set aside funds from secured creditors' share for a contingent statutory liability, causing no prejudice to the dissenting creditor. The extension of the e-voting window, clarificatory communications, and rejection of a Swiss Challenge were also held permissible, and the appeals were dismissed.
The NCLAT upheld approval of the resolution plan, applying limited judicial review and the CoC's commercial wisdom because no breach of Section 30(2) or material procedural irregularity was shown. Objections on CIRP costs failed since the plan treated unpaid costs as payable at actuals and, in any event, the issue had become academic after implementation. The EPF treatment was sustained because the plan set aside funds from secured creditors' share for a contingent statutory liability, causing no prejudice to the dissenting creditor. The extension of the e-voting window, clarificatory communications, and rejection of a Swiss Challenge were also held permissible, and the appeals were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
