https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446570 NCLAT Principal Bench dismissed appeals challenging CoC constitution and resolution plan approval in CIRP proceedings. Tribunal held that statutory responsibility for filing avoidance applications under IBC Sections 43, 45, 50, and 66 lies exclusively with Resolution Professional, not home buyers or unsuccessful resolution applicants. Court distinguished previous precedent where RP failed to verify claims and conduct proper valuation. Appellants failed to demonstrate grounds warranting interference with adjudicating authority's orders. Resolution plan provision granting CoC exclusive rights over avoidance recoveries was upheld. en-us Tue, 05 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Dec 2023 06:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446570 NCLAT Principal Bench dismissed appeals challenging CoC constitution and resolution plan approval in CIRP proceedings. Tribunal held that statutory responsibility for filing avoidance applications under IBC Sections 43, 45, 50, and 66 lies exclusively with Resolution Professional, not home buyers or unsuccessful resolution applicants. Court distinguished previous precedent where RP failed to verify claims and conduct proper valuation. Appellants failed to demonstrate grounds warranting interference with adjudicating authority's orders. Resolution plan provision granting CoC exclusive rights over avoidance recoveries was upheld. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Tue, 05 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446570