TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (4) TMI 1096
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Pratiksha Mishra. Mr. Vishnu Shriram & Ms. Namrata Saraogi, for R-1. Mr. Sandeep Singhi, Mr. Vishal Gehrana, Ms. Hancy Maini & Ms. Aakriti Vohra, for R-2. Mr. Siddhant Kant & Mr. Nikhil Mathur, for CoC JUDGMENT Per : Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain : This appeal is filed by four Appellants, namely, Balaji Minerals, Pawan Associates, V2P Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Shree Enterprises against the order dated 01.11.2021, passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi) by which application bearing I.A. No. 3286 of 2021 filed by Balaji Minerals, I.A. No. 3293 of 2021 filed by Pawan Associates, I.A. No. 3318 of 2021 filed by V2P Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd. and I.A. No. 3614 of 2021 filed by Shree Ent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Operational Creditors. Since the objections of the operational Creditors are already decided, therefore these IAs are dismissed as infructuous." 2. In brief, ICICI Bank, one of the financial creditors of the ESSAR Power M.P. Limited (Corporate Debtor), filed an application i.e. I.B. No. 863 (PB) of 2020 under Section 7 of the Insolvency And Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (in short 'Code') for the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (in short 'CIRP') against the Corporate Debtor. 3. The aforesaid application was admitted by the Adjudicating Authority on 03.10.2020 and Ashish Chhawchharia was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional (in short 'IRP'). The IRP constituted the Committee of Creditors (CoC) with ICICI Bank....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ated 12.05.2021) submitted by Adani Power Limited (as annexure Y)" 7. During the pendency of this application, the present Appellants filed their respective applications bearing I.A. No. 3286 of 2021, 3293 of 2021, 3318 of 2021 and 3614 of 2021, objecting to the resolution plan, approved by the CoC and sought amendment in it in conformity with the Code and Regulations. 8. The grievance of the Appellants raised in the said application is regarding the provision of NIL payment to the Operational Creditor in the resolution plan, however, all the applications have been dismissed by the Adjudicating Authority vide its impugned order after recording specific reasoning which has already been reproduced in the earlier part of this order. 9. Coun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t in violation of any of the provisions of the Code. 12. It is also submitted that when the liquidation value due to operational creditors in a given case is NIL, then a resolution plan proposing NIL payment to the operational creditors is in due compliance with Section 30(2) r/w Regulation 38 of the CIRP Regulations. 13. It is further argued that the operational creditors are not required to be paid anything more than the minimum liquidation value due to them and the CoC in its commercial wisdom is duly empowered to accept a resolution plan that may involve different payments to financial creditors and operational creditors. In this regard, reliance has been placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of COC of ESSAR ....