TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (2) TMI 1242
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....., Member (Judicial) 1. This court convened via video conference today. 2. The present application has been filed by CRPL Infra Private Limited (hereinafter, the Applicant) under section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter, the Code) against the Resolution Professional (hereinafter, the RP) and the members of Committee of Creditors (hereinafter, CoC) praying to (i) quash and set aside the resolution passed at the twelfth CoC meeting of the Corporate Debtor held on 10.09.2020 to the extent that it unreasonably and arbitrarily rejects the Applicant's request for extension of time to submit its resolution plan and to the extent it accepts the resolution plan of Respondent no. 8, and (ii) order the RP and the CoC t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aid date of meeting, therefore, an extension till 25.09.2020 be given. This request was considered at the said meeting and rejected by the CoC, the Applicant was offered to continue to be a part of the ongoing process so that it may have an opportunity at a later stage. However, due to uncertainty and unreasonableness of the said offer, the Applicant denied it. 7. The Applicant asseverated that the action of the RP as well as the CoC members is unreasonable and arbitrary because, the Applicant could not finalise its resolution plan for various reasons arising out of Covid-19 including its limited access to its office; Mr. Naresh Agarwal, one of the directors of the Applicant who was spearhaeading the resolution plan had been diagnosed with....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....04.2020 to 16.04.2020, then to 30.05.2020, further to 29.06.2020 and then finally to 31.07.2020. 11. In the eighth CoC meeting held on 31.07.2020, the RP apprised the CoC that he had received emails from two prospective resolution applicants, including the Applicant herein, requesting for further extension of last date of submission of the resolution plan. The CoC did not approve further extension of last date of submission of the resolution plan. 12. Till the last date of submission, three resolution plans were received from the three prospective resolution applicants including the Applicant herein and the CoC was apprised of the same in its ninth meeting held on 12.08.2020. 13. On 19.08.2020 the RP sent an email suggesting the prospec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing that the extension in timeline might lead to their withdrawal from the process and the fund earmarked for taking over the corporate debtor may be deployed in some other project. Furthermore, the CoC was of the view that in case the extension was granted, other resolution applicants may also seek further extensions. Moreover, as per the RFRP, the decision of CoC shall be final and the Applicant herein had given a declaration to abide by it. 15. Learned senior counsel relied on K. Sashidhar v. Indian overseas Bank and Ors. (2019) 12 SCC 150 and Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Ltd v. Satish Kumar Gupta and Ors. (2019) SCC Online SC 1478. 16. Learned senior counsel Mr Joy Saha concurred in submissions made on behalf of the RP ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by Om Logistics Ltd., i.e. Respondent No. 8 herein, in its fourteenth CoC meeting held on 17.10.2020. 20. From the submissions made on behalf of all the parties and the documents available on record, it is seen that four opportunities were granted for submission of resolution plan vide dates 16.04.2020, 30.05.2020, 29.06.2020, 31.07.2020, and two opportunities were granted to submit revised resolution plan vide 19.08.2020 and 03.09.2020 to the Applicant herein. Despite several opportunities being granted, the Applicant herein has failed to submit its revised resolution plan. 21. The Applicant's submission that the resolution plan could not be finalised due to lockdown and due to its directors, other than the authorised representative, b....