TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (2) TMI 1288
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... No. 131 of 2022 has been filed by the Applicant Aska Investments Private Limited under section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), seeking the following reliefs: a. "An order/orders and/or direction/directions cancelling and/or setting aside the 'revised report on eligibility of legal & general compliance of resolution applicant Uniglobal Paper Private Limited in consortium with trade sea international Pte. Ltd. dated 26th January 2022 issued by the respondent no. 1 under section 30(2) of the Code and being Annexure 'J' hereto. b. An order/orders of injunction and/or direction/directions in the nature of injunction restraining the respondent no. 1, its men, agents, servants and/or assigns from giving any effect to the 'revised report on eligibility of legal & general compliance of resolution applicant Uniglobal Paper Private limited in consortium with trade sea international Pte. ltd.' dated 26th January 2022 issued by the respondent no. 1 under section 30(2) of the Code and being Annexure 'J' hereto. c. An order/orders of injunction and / or direction/ directions in the nature of injunction restraining the Respondent No. 2 from cons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Para 2(26) & 2(27) and paras 64 and 65. The civil appeal to the Supreme Court from the above judgment of NCLAT has been withdrawn. II. Jaypee Kensington Boulevard Apartments v NBCC India Ltd. Civil Appeal no. 3395 of 2020, para 103 III. Re: Namdhari Food International (P.) Ltd. [MANU/NC/0010/2019] paras 17 & 18 ii. Para 2.2.16 (page 185 of the application) extinguishes future (gratuity) liability yet to be crystallised. The same is not permitted, as held in DBM Geotechnics and Constructions Pvt. Ltd. v. Dighi Port Limited [MANU/ND/8907/2019] para 101 & 102. iii. Para 2.2.16 at page 185 of the application-discrimination amongst creditors belonging to the same class: - Gratuity and other dues of the workmen working in four tea gardens currently in possession of Merico would be treated differently from the workmen who are working in the other tea gardens. In this regard, reliance has been placed on- (i). Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Ltd. vs. Satish Kr. Gupta & Ors. [(2019) 2 SCC 1] Para 56 (ii) K. Sashidhar vs. Indian Overseas Bank & Ors.[Civil Appeal No. 10673 of 2018] iv. Cl. 9.3.1 (page 193 of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... proposed Resolution Plan up for e-voting by the CoC. 7. The e-voting has commenced on 1st February, 2022 for 12 days and will be concluded on 12th February, 2022. 8. The Applicant states and submits that if the respondent no. 2 were to be allowed to proceed with e-voting in relation to the impugned Resolution Plan, which was not even supposed to be submitted or presented before or considered by the respondent no. 2, it would cause further delay in the already delayed CIRP of the Corporate Debtor which in turn would cause irreparable injury, loss and serious prejudice to the Corporate Debtor and its creditors. 9. Allowing the respondent no. 2 to proceed with e-voting in relation to the impugned Resolution Plan would be contrary to the provisions and the Scheme of the Code and the regulations made thereunder. 10.Since the e-voting on the impugned Resolution Plan has already commenced and in view of the aforementioned illegality of the impugned Resolution Plan and the consequent illegality of the said evoting on the impugned Resolution Plan, no effect can legally be given to any purported result in relation to such e-voting and no party involved in the CIRP of the Corpora....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Uniglobal Papers Private Limited, has refuted the contentions of the applicant. It has been stated by the Ld. Counsel on behalf of Respondent No. 3 that this application has been filed at the instance of one "Merico". According to Ld. Counsel appearing for R3, it is alarming that the applicant a member of CoC is supporting Merico Group against whom an application under section 66 of IBC and other applications challenging illegal occupation are pending. 8. It has further been stated on behalf of the Respondent No. 3, that all the allegations raised by applicant are incorrect and against the provisions and object of IBC Code. Therefore, the present application deserves to be rejected. E. Submissions on behalf of RP/Respondent number 1: 1. According to Ld. Sr. Counsel Mr. Joy Saha, appearing for the RP, in terms of judgement titled Arcelormittal India Private Limited vs. Satish Kumar Gupta and Ors. [(2019) 2 SCC 1]: Referring to Paragraph Nos. 79, 82 and 83, the Supreme Court has laid down in unequivocal terms that any Application preferred by any party prior to the approval of the Resolution Plan be considered pre-mature. 2. It has further been stated on behalf of RP, any....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 30.11.2020 Submission of First Version of the Resolution Plan 29.03.2021 Submission of Second Version of the Resolution Plan 24.05.2021 Submission of Third Version of the Resolution Plan 08.07.2021 Submission of Fourth Version of the Resolution Plan 30.09.2021 Regulation 39(1A) of the Insolvency And Bankruptcy Board Of India (Insolvency Resolution Process For Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 was substituted by Notification no. IBBI/2021- 22/GN/REG078, dated 30th September, 2021 (w.e.f. 30-09-2021). 07.12.2021 Submission Of Fifth/Final Version of the Resolution Plan 22.12.2021 24.12.2021 The CoC intimated the Resolution Applicants of the challenge mechanism which would be adopted by them for consideration of the Resolution Plans. 28.01.2022 CoC Meeting was held and the Resolution Plans were put to voting. A timeline of 12 days from 01.02.2022 was decided to complete the process of voting. 01.02.2022 The e-voting process on the Resolution Plan commenced 12.02.2022 The e-voting process on the Resolution Plan was intended to conclude, however one of the member of the Committee of Creditors sought for an extension of 5 ....