TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 1162
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....short 'IBC', assailing the order dated 16th August, 2021 passed by the Adjudicating Authority, (National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad) For short 'NCLT' in Interlocutory Application No.273 of 2021 (filed by the respondent No.1 - H.R. Commercial Private Limited, in IA No.698 of 2020 (filed by Liquidator) in Company Petition (IB) No.53 of 2017. For the sake of convenience, we propose to refer to the facts narrated in Civil Appeal No.7722 of 2021. FACTS OF THE CASE 2. The facts of the case necessary to decide the present appeals are as follows. 2.1 Vide Agreement dated 26th February, 2008, Gujarat Maritime Board For short 'GMB' leased out a parcel of land to ABG Shipyard Limited For short 'Corporate Debtor' for a period of thirty years. On 1st August, 2017, ICICI Bank Limited moved an application for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process For short 'CIRP' against the Corporate Debtor under Section 7 of the IBC read with Rule 4 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules For short 'IBC Rules', 2016 before the Adjudicating Authority, NCLT, Ahmedabad [CP(IB) No.53/NCLT/AHM/2017] wherein, Mr. Sundaresh Bhat was appointed as an I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....CC decided to conduct a second Swiss Challenge Process at a base price of Rs.460 crores (being lower than the earlier calculated reserve price of Rs.516 crores) as some assets from the Dahej Material were kept reserved for a potential buyer. The second Swiss Challenge Process was initiated on 22nd March, 2021 and at the Anchor Bid stage, the respondent No.2 - Liquidator received bids from R.K. Industries, appellant in Civil Appeal No.7731/2021, respondent No.4 - V.K. Industrial Corporation Limited and respondent No.5 - M/s Ankit International. 2.4. On 23rd March, 2021, the appellant submitted its bid of Rs.431 crores along with Expression of Interest and deposited a sum of Rs.1.00 crore in terms of the bid requirement. Though the last date for submitting the Earnest Money Deposit For short 'EMD' in terms of the Process Document was as 24th March, 2021, the appellant deposited the EMD of Rs.43.10 crores with the respondent No.2 - Liquidator for selection as an Anchor Bidder on 26th March, 2021 along with an affidavit stating inter alia that it agreed to be bound by the terms of the Swiss Challenge Process. 2.5. The second stage of the Swiss Challenge Process commenced on 27th ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uing directions to the respondent No.2 - Liquidator to consider and accept its offer for buying the consolidated assets of the Corporate Debtor. Around the same time, the respondent No.8 - Kanter Steel India Private Limited also moved an application (IA No.379 of 2021) before the NCLT for quashing of the second Swiss Challenge Process. 5. On 5th July, 2021, the NCLT directed the respondent No.2 - Liquidator to permit the respondent No.7 - Welspun to inspect the assets of the Corporate Debtor. After the said inspection, vide letter dated 2nd August, 2021, the respondent No.7 - Welspun hiked its offer for the consolidated assets from Rs.627.50 crores to Rs.650 crores on an 'as is where is basis'; 'as is what is basis' and 'wherever there is basis'. 6. On 6th August, 2021, a Meeting of the SCC was convened wherein, the respondent No.2- Liquidator appraised the stakeholders of the further developments that had taken place and the offer letter dated 2nd August, 2021 issued by the respondent No.7-Welspun bidding for the consolidated assets of the Corporate Debtor. The SCC advised the respondent No.2-0Liquidator to place the relevant facts and the bid received from the respondent No.7-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the impugned judgment dated 10th December, 2021. However, the NCLAT has gone on to modify the order dated 16th August, 2021 passed by the NCLT directing the respondent No.2- Liquidator to complete the entire private sale within three weeks in the following manner : "39. It is clear from the ratio of the above mentioned judgments that the specific context in which an auction is carried out can only elucidate the aspect of arbitrariness and favouritism or otherwise. Thus, in the present appeal where the Impugned Order challenging the stoppage of second Swiss Challenge Process and taking up a fresh private sale process has been challenged, it is seen that the decision of the stakeholders and the liquidator, upon which the Adjudicating Authority has based its order does not grant any particular party any favour. It is driven by the stakeholders' wish to get the liquidation process concluded early without losing sight of maximization of value of assets. Also, even though this is a private sale as opposed to sale by a government authority, we are of the opinion that the standards and norms of transparency, fairness and responsibility should be adopted without any qualificat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 11. Arguing on behalf of the appellant-R.K. Industries, Mr. Gaurav Mitra, learned Senior counsel submitted that the NCLAT has erred in upholding the order of NCLT of going in for Private Sale of the composite assets of the Corporate Debtor inasmuch as there were no takers for the same at the announced reserve price in five rounds of e-auction conducted earlier by the respondent No.2-Liquidator. Contending that when there are no allegations or observations made in the impugned order that the Swiss Process challenge was irregular or improper, there was no justification for interfering with the said process that had already been set into motion for a second time in March, 2021 wherein the appellant was declared as the Anchor Bidder thereby giving it a Right of First Refusal For short 'ROFR' in respect of the Dahej Material. Finding fault with the observations made in the impugned order that the views of the stakeholders regarding the sale of assets are significant as they are the ultimate beneficiaries of the liquidation process and a substantial period of time had already been spent in the liquidation process without any fruitful results, it was submitted on behalf of the appellant....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cannot be a ground to take such a step in an arbitrary manner, as has been done in the instant case, more so when the entire sale process had almost reached a closure when respondent No.7 - Welspun suddenly intervened seeking a composite sale of the assets of the Corporate Debtor. Lastly, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant submitted that the NCLAT has erred in directing that a fresh bid ought to be conducted. Instead, the appellant being the Anchor Bidder, ought to be given the benefit of matching the highest bid submitted without scrapping the Second Swiss Challenge process. 14. Mr. Arvind Datar and Mr. Savla, learned Senior counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 - Liquidator sought to repel the arguments advanced on behalf of the appellant and asserted that the respondent No.2 - Liquidator had conducted the liquidation process of the Corporate Debtor in consultation with the stakeholders at every step and in the best interest of the Corporate Debtor, while strictly adhering to the provisions of the IBC and the Liquidation Regulations. Laying emphasis on the mandate of the Liquidator under the IBC to ensure maximisation of the value of the assets of the Corporate Debto....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve the same concluded in its favour. Moreover, the said process comprises of two-stage bidding and the second stage which involved opening the process to the public to match the bid given by the appellant as the Anchor Bidder, was not concluded. Relying on the decisions in Laxmikant and Others v. Satyawan and Others (1996) 4 SCC 208 and State of Jharkhand and Others v. CWE-Soma Consortium (2016) 14 SCC 172, it was canvassed that since the Second Swiss Challenge Process was not concluded, no vested right had accrued in favour of the appellant for seeking enforcement in the Court of Law. 17. It was next argued that having accepted the terms of Anchor Bid Document, the appellant cannot be permitted to challenge the decision of the respondent No. 2- Liquidator who had to cancel the Second Swiss Challenge Process. In this context, reference was made to the affidavit dated 23rd March, 2020 submitted by the appellant wherein it had undertaken to remain unconditionally and irrevocably bound by the Swiss Challenge Process document as also by the decision of the respondent No.2 - Liquidator to cancel/ abandon/modify at any time solely at his discretion, the sale process or any part thereo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e the material from the Dahej shipyard thereby delaying sale of the Dahej land and buildings and adversely impacting the value of the Corporate Debtor and its assets. 19. The only grievance raised on behalf of the respondent No.2 - Liquidator is in respect of the directions issued in the impugned order calling upon him to restart the process of Private Sale dated 24th August, 2021 after giving an open notice to all the prospective buyers. Supporting a similar stand taken by the respondent No.7 - Welspun (appellant in Civil Appeal No. 7731 of 2021) that any such step will delay the liquidation process and result in putting the clock back to the stage of open auction, learned counsel submitted that the process that is under challenge is the Private Sale process which is duly contemplated in Regulation 33(2) of the Liquidation Regulations and cannot be questioned. Additionally, reference was made to a subsequent development where the Core Committee of Financial Creditors conducted a meeting on 15th December, 2021, after the impugned order was passed and had expressed a unanimous view that the Private Sale process should be continued and not restarted having regard to the fact that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of Creditors of Educomp Solutions Limited and Another (2022) 2 SC 401 wherein it has been observed that a delay in the liquidation process results in depletion in the value of the Corporate Debtor and a low realization, learned counsel for Welspun argued that it is imperative to preserve the economic value of the assets of the Corporate Debtor and expedite the realization process by carrying it forward instead of putting the clock back and directing the respondent No.2 - Liquidator to start afresh. In fact, the aforesaid direction was sought to be described as a fusion of two distinct concepts of 'Private Sale' and 'public auction' and it was submitted that issuance of an 'open notice' runs contrary to the very object of going in for a private sale. Learned counsel for Welspun concluded by citing a recent decision in Jaypee Kensington Boulevard Apartments Welfare Association and Others v. NBCC (India) Limited and Others (2022) 1 SCC 401 where emphasis has been laid on the object of the IBC being to ensure resolution/liquidation in a time bound manner for maximization of value assets in order to balance the interest of all the stakeholders. It was urged that as the respondent No.2 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Shipyard land and buildings. Simultaneously, a similar application was moved by the applicant before the NCLAT. However, the said application was not on record when the Company Appeal was listed before the NCLAT on 24th November, 2021, on which date, orders were reserved in the Appeal followed by the impugned judgment that was passed on 10th December, 2021. The applicant seeks impleadment in the present Appeal and supports the impugned judgment to the extent that the NCLAT had directed the respondent No.2 - Liquidator to restart the sale process after issuing an open notice to the prospective buyers, thereby affording an opportunity to the applicant to submit a bid for the consolidated assets of the Corporate Debtor on a plea that so far, its offer is the highest. ANALYSIS 23. We have perused the impugned judgment as well as the documents placed on record and carefully considered the rival submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties. Only two points arise for consideration in these appeals. Firstly, whether the respondent No.2 - Liquidator was justified in discontinuing the Second Swiss Challenge Process for the sale of a part of the assets of the Corporate Debto....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cial Reconstruction (BIFR), Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) and National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and their respective Appellate Tribunals. Liquidation of companies is handled by the High Courts. Individual bankruptcy and insolvency is dealt with under the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909, and the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 and is dealt with by the Courts. The existing framework for insolvency and bankruptcy is inadequate, ineffective and results in undue delays in resolution, therefore, the proposed legislation. 2. The objective of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2015 is to consolidate and amend the laws relating to reorganisation and insolvency resolution of corporate persons, partnership firms and individuals in a time-bound manner for maximisation of value of assets of such persons, to promote entrepreneurship, availability of credit and balance the interests of all the stakeholders including alteration in the priority of payment of government dues and to establish an Insolvency and Bankruptcy Fund, and matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. An effective legal framework for timely resolution of insolvency and bankruptcy would support developm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... establish an Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India, and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto." 28. In EBIX Singapore Private Limited (supra), discussing the raison d'étre of the IBC for giving a purposive interpretation of the statute, this Court has observed that : "96. .... IBC was introduced as a watershed moment for Insolvency law in India that consolidated processes under several disparate statutes such as the 2013 Act, SICA, SARFAESI, the Recovery of Debts Act, the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909 and the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920, into a single code. A comprehensive and time-bound framework was introduced with smooth transitions between reorganisation and liquidation, with an aim to inter alia maximise the value of assets of all persons and balance the interest of all stakeholders" 29. The underlying object of the IBC of maximization of the value of the assets of the Corporate Debtor has been highlighted in Swiss Ribbons Private Limited (supra) in the following words : "27. As is discernible, the Preamble gives an insight into what is sought to be achieved by the Code. The Code is first and foremost, a Code f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the bankruptcy process and must be strengthened as part of ensuring a robust legal framework. The process flow in liquidation shares some objectives in common with that of resolving insolvency. Preservation of time value is the most important, and efficient outcomes under collective action is the next, both of which are important principles driving the design. However, this is not straightforward in implementation, particularly in an environment where different creditors have different rights over the assets of the entity, information is asymmetric, and governance and enforcement has been traditionally weak." 31. In the Fifth Report of the Insolvency Law Committee, May, 2022 published by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government of India The Fifth Report of the Insolvency Law Committee, May, 2022 published by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government of India at <https://www.ibbi.gov.in/uploads/resources/f841a45902d901ef311fe6d76127d094.pd f>, last accessed 06-07-2022 , while examining whether the role of the SCC ought to be reviewed and suitable provisions be enacted in the IBC to give its statutory recognition, the Committee observed that the BLRC has designed the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ealisation is lower when there are delays. Hence, delays cause value destruction. Thus, achieving a high recovery rate is primarily about identifying and combating the sources of delay." 33. It has been noticed from past experience that judicial delays is one of the major reasons for the failure of the insolvency process. Thus, much emphasis was laid in the BLRC Report on expediting the liquidation process by curtailing the delay to ensure that the assets of the Corporate Debtor do not get frittered away or depreciated due to the time lag. Once the stage of CIRP is over and the process of liquidation is set into motion, it is critical that least time is lost in liquidating the assets of the Corporate Debtor. The reasons are not far to see. A quick, smooth and seamless process of liquidation goes a long way in stemming deterioration of the value of the assets of the Corporate Debtor in liquidation and increases the chances of maximizing the returns to the stakeholders. 34. Keeping in mind the underlying object of this special enactment, we may directly proceed to examine Chapter III of the IBC that encapsulates the liquidation process right from the stage of initiation of liqu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... stand vested in the Liquidator. The powers and duties of the Liquidator have been elaborated in Section 35. To contextualize the ensuing discussion, extracted below is Section 35 of the IBC: "35. Powers and duties of liquidator - (1) Subject to the directions of the Adjudicating Authority, the liquidator shall have the following powers and duties, namely:- xxxx xxxx xxxx (b) to take into his custody or control all the assets, property, effects and actionable claims of the corporate debtor; xxxx xxxx xxxx (f) subject to section 52, to sell the immovable and movable property and actionable claims of the corporate debtor in liquidation by public auction or private contract, with power to transfer such property to any person or body corporate, or to sell the same in parcels in such manner as may be specified; xxxx xxxx xxxx (n) to apply to the Adjudicating Authority for such orders or directions as may be necessary for the liquidation of the corporate debtor and to report the progress of the liquidation process in a manner as may be specified by the Board. xxxx xxxx xxxx (2) The liquidator shall have the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s, etc. The liquidator may sell- (a) an asset on a standalone basis; (b) the assets in a slump sale; (c) a set of assets collectively; (d) the assets in parcels; (e) the corporate debtor as a going concern; or (f) the business(s) of the corporate debtor as a going concern: Provided that where an asset is subject to security interest, it shall not be sold under any of the clauses (a) to (f) unless the security interest therein has been relinquished to the liquidation estate.] 33. Mode of sale. (1) The liquidator shall ordinarily sell the assets of the corporate debtor through an auction in the manner specified in Schedule I. (2) The liquidator may sell the assets of the corporate debtor by means of private sale in the manner specified in Schedule I when- (a) the asset is perishable; (b) the asset is likely to deteriorate in value significantly if not sold immediately; (c) the asset is sold at a price higher than the reserve price of a failed auction; or (d) the prior permission of the Adjudicating Authority has been obtained for such sale: P....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....orate Debtor in liquidation through a public auction or a private contract, either collectively, or in a piecemeal manner. The underlying object of the Statute is to protect and preserve the assets of the Corporate Debtor in liquidation and proceed to sell them at the best possible price. Towards this object, the provisions of the IBC have empowered the Liquidator to go in for a public auction or a private contract as a mode of sale. Besides reporting the progress made, the Liquidator can also apply to the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) for appropriate orders and directions considered necessary for liquidation of the Corporate Debtor. The Liquidator is permitted to consult the stakeholders who are entitled to distribution of the sale proceeds. However, the proviso to Section 35 (2) of the IBC makes it clear that the opinion of the stakeholders would not be binding on the Liquidator. Regulation 8 of the Liquidation Regulations refers to the consultative process with the stakeholders, as specified in Section 35 (2) of the IBC and states that they shall extend all necessary assistance and cooperation to the Liquidator for completing the liquidation process. Regulation 31A has introduce....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (1) of the Liquidation Regulations, the respondent No.2 - Liquidator took steps to sell the assets of the Corporate Debtor through the e-auction process not once or twice, but on five separate occasions. On each of the said occasion, efforts were made by the respondent No.2 - Liquidator to conduct a consolidated sale of the assets of the Corporate Debtor, but with no fruitful results. Faced with the said situation, the respondent No.2 - Liquidator approached the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) in terms of Section 35 (1)(n), IBC read with Regulation 33(2) of the Liquidation Regulations for seeking permission to sell the assets of the Corporate Debtor through Private Sale. Only after due permission was granted, did the respondent No.2 - Liquidator approach the stakeholders for consultation. In the meeting held on 28th January, 2021, the stakeholders resolved that the prospective bidders, who wished to participate in the Private Sale of the Dahej Material, be encouraged to do so by adopting the Swiss Challenge Process. Pertinently, the first stage of the said process requires selection of an Anchor Bidder; the second stage entails inviting prospective bidders to submit their bids again....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e the current process or a part thereof contemplated hereunder (at any stage without any liability). Further, the Liquidator reserves the right to reprice and resize or change the lots / combination of lots in the current Sale Process or in any other sale process that may be contemplated, in accordance with applicable laws and without incurring any liability in this regard, in the best interest of the stakeholders. Schedule - II : General Terms & Conditions xxxx xxxx xxxx "k. This not an offer document and is issued with no commitment or assurances. This intimation document does not constitute and will not be deemed to constitute any offer, commitment or any representation of the Liquidator / ABGSL. The Process has to be completed as set out under this document to conclude the transaction/sale successfully." xxxx xxxx xxxx ''m. It is clarified that issuance of this Process Document does not create any kind of binding obligation on the part of the Liquidator or ABG to effectuate the sale of the assets of ABG." xxxx xxxx xxxx "s. The Liquidator reserves the right to cancel, abandon or reject a Bidder / Successful ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r reserves the right to decide the procedure for including such potential Bidders into the Sale Process. All bidders agree and accept that the Liquidator has the right to accept or reject any Bids even after the deadline as prescribed herein or at any stage of the Sale Process in order to maximize the realization from the sale of assets in the best interest of the stakeholders." xxxx xxxx xxxx "mm. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein : the Liquidator proposes to sell the assets of the Company as a whole to maximize overall recovery and decision for sale shall also be made after taking cognizance of operational management matters to effectuate and practically enable the Sale Process for the collective sale of assets of the Company and will take all steps and actions required to effectuate this." 47. A bare perusal of the aforesaid clauses of the Anchor Bid Document and the Second Swiss Challenge Process Document, leave no manner of doubt that the prospective bidders were informed that the Liquidator had reserved the right to abandon/cancel/terminate/waive the said process and/or part thereof at any stage; that issuance of the Anchor Bid Doc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....participation that has been recognized by this Court for its transparency [Refer : Ravi Development (supra)]. Ultimately, the IBC has left it to the discretion of the Liquidator to explore the best possible method for selling the assets of the Corporate Debtor in liquidation, which includes Private Sale through direct negotiations with the object of maximizing the value of the assets offered for sale. 50. In the instant case, there was good reason for the respondent No.2 - Liquidator to have halted the Second Swiss Challenge Process midstream and approached the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) armed with an offer of Rs.675 crores received from the respondent No.7 - Welspun who had shown interest in the composite sale of the Dahej assets. In fact, this was all along the preferred choice of the respondent No.2-Liquidator as can be seen from the fact that when public auctions were conducted by him on five earlier occasions, bids were invited for the composite assets of the Corporate Debtor. It is a different matter that the earlier eauctions turned out to be unsuccessful, thus compelling the respondent No.2 - Liquidator to explore other options, including the option to sell the assets....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to refrain from substituting its decisions for that of the tendering agency [Ref.: State of Madhya Pradesh and Others v. Nandlal Jaiswal and Others (1986) 4 SCC 566, Tata Cellular (supra) and Air India (supra)]. In Nandlal Jaiswal and Others (supra), this Court held that while granting a licence for setting up a new industry, the State Government is not under any obligation to advertise and invite offers for the said purpose and that the State Government is well entitled to negotiate with those who have come up with an offer to set up such an industry. In 5 M & T Consultants, Secunderabad v. S.Y. Nawab and Another (2003) 8 SCC 100, the court concluded as under : "17. ...... It is by now well settled that non-floating of tenders or absence of public auction or invitation alone is no sufficient reason to castigate the move or an action of a public authority as either arbitrary or unreasonable or amounting to mala fide or improper exercise or improper abuse of power by the authority concerned. Courts have always leaned in favour of sufficient latitude being left with the authorities to adopt their own techniques of management of projects with concomitant economic expediencies....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1982) 2 SCC 365 . It has been repeatedly pointed out that State or the authority which can be held to be State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution is not bound to accept the highest tender or bid. The acceptance of the highest bid is subject to the conditions of holding the public auction and the right of the highest bidder has to be examined in context with the different conditions under which such auction has been held. In the present case no right had accrued to the respondent either on the basis of the statutory provision under Rule 4(3) or under the conditions of the sale which had been notified before the public auction was held." (emphasis added) 54. Further, in CWE - Soma Consortium (supra), this Court had held as under : "23. The right to refuse the lowest or any other tender is always available to the Government. In the case in hand, the respondent has neither pleaded nor established mala fide exercise of power by the appellant. While so, the decision of the Tender Committee ought not to have been interfered with by the High Court. In our considered view, the High Court erred in sitting in appeal over the decision of the appellant to cancel th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vate Sale process where not only the appellant, but all the other prospective bidders who had participated in the process were permitted by the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) to make a bid in respect of the consolidated assets of the Corporate Debtor. In its anxiety to claim a vested right as an Anchor Bidder, the appellant tends to forget that the Swiss Challenge Process adopted by the respondent No.2 - Liquidator also falls in the category of a Private Sale, referred to in Schedule-I(2) under Regulation 33 of the Liquidation Regulations. For conducting a Private Sale, all that the Liquidator is required to do is to prepare a strategy to approach the interested parties. He is authorized to directly liaise with the potential buyers to ensure that realization from the sale of the assets can be maximized. We do not find any infirmity in the said approach adopted by the respondent No.2 - Liquidator. 57. When compared to the above protracted process described in para 53 above, a single buyer for the Dahej land along with the metal scrap, etc., lying at the complex was bound to speed up the entire process inasmuch as the successful bidder could be handed over the possession straightaw....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... process of Private Sale by issuing fresh notices to all the prospective buyers without limiting them to those who had participated in the process. No doubt, a public auction entails the procedure of issuing public notices. But that is not the case with a Private Sale where the procedure prescribed permits the Liquidator to directly liaise with the potential buyer and conduct the negotiations. It may be emphasized that these are commercial transactions and purely business driven decisions, which are not amenable to judicial review. The insolvency regime introduced under the IBC has placed fetters on the power of interference by the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) and the Appellant Authority (NCLAT). The decision of the NCLT to have the sale of the composite assets negotiated with the parties who had participated in the earlier rounds of sale, cannot be described as a rushed decision for the NCLAT to have modified the said order and direct that the clock be set back to the initial stage of issuing notices to the prospective buyers. No such relief was sought by any of the parties to the lis, nor has the NCLAT given any plausible reason for issuing such a direction. 60. The powers ve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... brought to our notice by the respondent No.2 - Liquidator that close on the heels of the impugned judgment passed by the NCLAT delivered on 10th December, 2021, the Core Committee of Financial Creditors of the Corporate Debtor had conducted a meeting on 15th December, 2021 and had unanimously ratified the view of the respondent No.2 - Liquidator that the bid process commenced on 24th August, 2021, ought to be continued and not restarted having regard to the fact that it had taken almost three years to find such buyers and the sale was at the cusp of being closed. It was also recorded in the minutes of the meeting that several attempts had already been made to solicit interest from parties but none had come forward to make an offer for the composite purchase of the assets. We may note that the Core Committee constitutes 70.3% of the financial creditors and when they have weighed in to support the stand taken by the respondent No.2 - Liquidator to continue the bid process commenced on 24th August, 2021, we do not see any reason to foist the view of the NCLAT on the respondent No.2 - Liquidator that he ought to restart the process for sale of the composite assets of the Corporate Deb....