TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (6) TMI 650
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on the creditors, members and other stakeholders of the Corporate Debtor; or in the alternate (c) To allow the appellant to submit its Resolution Plan with modifications or amendments etc and direct the Resolution Professional and the Committee of Creditors to consider the Resolution Plan submitted by the Appellant. (d) To call for the Minutes of the Meetings of the Committee of Creditors of the Corporate Debtor for proper adjudication of the present appeal. (e) Exclude the time period during which the present dispute is pending before the Hon'ble Adjudicating Authority and this Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal from the total time period of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process i.e. from 10-8-2018 till the pendency of the present Appeal; (f) Any other/further order(s) as this Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petition was filed by M/s Kochar Overseas Pvt Ltd (Corporate Debtor) under section 10 of I&B Code which was admitted by the Tribunal and declaring the moratorium. Interim Resolution Professional was appointed with necessary directions. Thereafter an application was fi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Debtor was authorised by the Appellant to operate/sign cheques in Resolution Applicant bank accounts. Resolution Applicant also admitted that there was sale of innova car by the Corporate Debtor to appellant. Appellant also admitted that the Corporate Debtor was receiving rental income from the Resolution Applicant for using part of Corporate Debtor's factory premises. Resolution Professional stated that the Resolution Applicant was more interested in bailing out the guarantors of the Corporate Debtor when he reitereated repeatedly that with the acceptance of his Resolution Plan, the individual guarantors of Corporate Debtor would be discharged/absolved of their personal liabilities as guarantors. Resolution applicant vide his letter dated 10-8-2018 did not express his intention to be part of the discussions on the Resolution Plan. 5. After hearing the parties the Adjudicating Authority passed the impugned order dated 1-11-2018. Relevant portion of the impugned order is as under:- "21.xxxxxx the Committee of Creditors considered the merits of the plan and rejected it. It is mentioned in the Agenda Item No. 4 that the Resolution Plan includes all the properties of the corpor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e authorisation to send cheque was withdrawn. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that MR. Vikramjit Singh was never a part of management of the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant further argued that there was no transfer of assets between corporate debtor and the appellant except a INNOVA car. Learned counsel for the appellant further argued that the appellant has made payments of rent for using the part of the factory of corporate debtor. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that payment of rent does not mean it is a related party. Learned counsel for the appellant further argued that the brand name "Double Bull Basmati" is owned privately in the name of Ajit Singh Kochar, Dalip Singh and thus does not belong to Kochar Overseas Pvt Ltd but relates to persons individually. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that with mutual consent Mr. Ajit Singh had allowed appellant to use their brand name. Learned counsel for the appellant stressed that the appellant is not related party as per provisions of IBC 2016. 9. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the resolution plan has been rejected on the sole ground that the Plan contemplates release of personal ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ngh, suspended director of Corporate Debtor acted as an authorised signatory for the bank accounts of appellant company and he was authorised to issue the cheques and authorised to sign the same. 14. Learned counsel for the Respondent argued that though the appellant increased the bid value of Resolution Plan to Rs. 1200 lacs but put the condition that the increased value includes all the properties of Corporate Debtor, guarantors and discharge of individual guarantees. The Resolution Plan was rejected by Financial Creditor with 100% voting and the reasons for non-acceptance of the Resolution Plan were duly communicated to all the Members. 15. Learned counsel for the Financial creditor drew this Tribunal attention to Minutes of 7th COC Meeting and argued that in the said Meeting one suspended director of Corporate Debtor and one representative of suspended director of Corporate Debtor were also present when the resolution plan of the appellant was rejected and it was recommended liquidation of the Corporate Debtor. In the said COC Meeting the reasons for non-acceptance of Resolution Plan were also recorded. 16. We have heard the parties and perused the record. 17. On hearing th....