TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (7) TMI 212
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....National Company Law Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Prayagraj), whereby the Adjudicating Authority rejected the IA filed by the Appellant challenging the Resolution Plan. The Appeal is also challenging the Adjudicating Authority's another order dated 29.03.2023 passed in I.A. No. 3 of 2022 allowing the implementation of Resolution Plan without considering the Appellant's case for settlement under Section 12A of the Code (second order). 2. Section 7 application, filed by sole Financial Creditor- Bank of India against the BB Foods Pvt. Ltd. (the 'Corporate Debtor'), was admitted on 22.10.2019 and Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (in short 'CIRP') was allowed to be initiated. 3. The Appellant is Promoter, Shareholder and Suspended Director of the Corporate Debtor and aggrieved by the both Impugned Orders, the present appeal has been filed before this Appellate Tribunal. 4. We note that that the order dated 22.10.2019 for initiating the CIRP against the Corporate Debtor was challenged before this Appellate Tribunal, who granted interim stay on the operation of the said order, however finally this Appellate Tribunal rejected the Appeal of the Appellant on 28.02.2019 and the CIRP o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lant to the Committee of Creditors (in short 'CoC') under Section 12A of the Code. 10. Learned Counsel for the Appellant stated that as per Section 12 of the Code, the Resolution Process is required to be completed within 180 days and under Section 12(3) of the Code on the application, the Adjudicating Authority could further consider another 90 days and under Section 12 of the Code, the maximum period for Resolution Process is 330 days. Learned Counsel for the Appellant further stated that the Adjudicating Authority permitted exclusion of only 409 days spent in litigation before this Appellate Tribunal and Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and therefore the revised Resolution Plan submitted by M/s Sirius Foods Pvt. Ltd./ Respondent No. 2, which was approved by the CoC/ sole Financial Creditor on 22.12.2021, therefore period was much more than allowed time for Resolution Process. 11. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the Respondent No. 1 has wrongly relied on order dated 03.06.2020 of the Adjudicating Authority presuming that it has granted benefit of 128 days especially when I.A. No. 126 of 2020 filed by the Respondent No. 1 did not contain any table or chart indicat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... M/s Sirius Foods Pvt. Ltd. was not ineligible merely on the ground that Mr. Rahoul Subberwal was Managing Director of three companies of UK which went under Liquidation under UK Laws. Learned Counsel for the Respondents submitted that disqualification under UK Laws start only when the order was made only on an application made by the Secretary of State under Section 6 of the UK Act, which was not the case therein and also no appeal was preferred against the concerned director in the UK, therefore the eligibility criteria as submitted by the Appellant referring to laws 29 A (j) r/w 5 (28) of the Code are not attracted. 17. Learned Counsel for the Respondents submitted that it is the commercial wisdom of the CoC which is paramount and cannot be challenged by the Appellant. Learned Counsel for the Respondents further submitted that in the Court there is no stipulation that the Resolution Plan is required to be more than the liquidation value and the same has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the matter of Maharashtra Seamless Ltd. V/s. Padmanabhan Venkatesh [(2020) 11 SCC 467]. 18. Learned Counsel for the Respondents stated that M/s. Sirius Foods Pvt. Ltd. is not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tions of Committee of creditors filed an application dated 28.05.2020 under Section 12(2) of the code vide which resolution professional sought an extension of 90 days for the CIRP process and further sought the exclusion of lockdown period as per Regulation 40 C. The Adjudicating Authority granted extension of 90 days beyond 180 days of CIRP and further granted exemption of lockdown period w.e.f. 25.03.2020. The order dated 03.06.2020, although did not specify the number of days that stood exempted, but granted exemption in terms of Section 40-C. We observe from the Order dated 03.06.2020, where the Adjudicating Authority has recorded the following: "Considering the submission made by the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant, this Court is of the view that the cause shown is sufficient, accordingly, the application is hereby allowed. The extension of further period of 90 days beyond 180 days of CIRP is hereby extended along with exemption of lockdown period w.e.f. 25.03.2020 as per the notification issued by the Central Government". (Emphasis Supplied) Thus, it is clear that there was no error in the Impugned Order on this account. 23. Another contention of the Appellant is that t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....find merits in the arguments of the Respondents and also note the detailed deliberations by the Adjudicating Authority on this aspect in the Impugned Orders in IA No. 30 of 2022 covering various laws of the UK and cited judgments. After considering all facts, laws and averments of both the parties and reasoned speaking orders of the Adjudicating Authority on this aspect, we do not find any error on this account in the Impugned Order. 25. One more issue raised by the Appellant is regarding non consideration of the settlement offer made by him to the CoC and also that the Resolution offer of the M/s Sirius Foods Pvt. Ltd. / Respondent No. 2 / Resolution Applicant is lower than the liquidation value as well as the settlement offer amount of the Appellant. In this connection, during averments it has been brought to our notice that liquidation value was Rs. 17.87 Crores and the settlement offer of the Appellant was Rs. 19.63 Crores. However, the total Resolution Plan was of Rs. 27.27 Crores. As per the Resolution Plan total payment to be made to Financial Creditor consist of Rs. 16.27 Crores, along with CIRP cost of Rs. 1 Crore or actuals and proposal towards working capital and repair....