https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445282 NCLAT Principal Bench dismissed an appeal challenging rejection of a resolution plan application. The tribunal held that appellant was correctly classified as a related party due to continuing shareholding in the corporate debtor, despite a settlement agreement that could not be implemented. The appellant was therefore not entitled to vote in the Committee of Creditors. The tribunal found no error in allowing another entity's participation as it held only 16% shareholding, below the 20% threshold for related party classification. The resolution plan's differential treatment of affected and unaffected homebuyers was deemed rational based on mortgage clearance status. As a dissenting minority homebuyer, appellant could not challenge a plan approved by majority of the homebuyer class. en-us Thu, 02 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Nov 2023 09:14:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445282 NCLAT Principal Bench dismissed an appeal challenging rejection of a resolution plan application. The tribunal held that appellant was correctly classified as a related party due to continuing shareholding in the corporate debtor, despite a settlement agreement that could not be implemented. The appellant was therefore not entitled to vote in the Committee of Creditors. The tribunal found no error in allowing another entity's participation as it held only 16% shareholding, below the 20% threshold for related party classification. The resolution plan's differential treatment of affected and unaffected homebuyers was deemed rational based on mortgage clearance status. As a dissenting minority homebuyer, appellant could not challenge a plan approved by majority of the homebuyer class. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Thu, 02 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445282