TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 422
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... No. 2829 of 2021 filed by the Resolution Professional of Essar Power M.P. Ltd. (Corporate Debtor) for approval of the resolution plan submitted by Respondent No. 3/Successful Resolution Applicant (SRA) (Adani Power Ltd.) has been allowed and application bearing I.A. No. 4099 of 2021 filed by the Appellant objecting to the resolution plan and I.A. No. 3015 of 2021 filed by the Appellant against the adjudication of its claim of Rs. 2643,54,00,000/- as Rs. 1, treating the same as contingent claim, has been dismissed. 2. In brief, the financial creditor (ICICI Bank Ltd.) filed an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (in short 'Code') bearing No. (IB)/863/PB/2020 for the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (in short 'CIRP') against the Corporate Debtor which was admitted on 29.09.2020 and Respondent No. 1 was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) who continued as the Resolution Professional (RP). 3. The RP, consequent upon his appointment as IRP, made a public announcement in Form A on 10.10.2020 in the newspaper, namely, Business Standard - Delhi - Hindi Edition, Raj Express -Jabalpur - Hindi Edition and Financial....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....endency of this application, various applications were filed by the Operational Creditors including the one by the present Appellant i.e. I.A. No. 4099 of 2021, questioning the validity of the resolution plan and also filed I.A. No. 3015 of 2021 seeking admission of Rs. 2632,54,00,000/- as an operational debt. 10. The Adjudicating Authority vide its impugned order, allowed I.A. No. 2829 of 2021, filed by the R1, approving the resolution plan and simultaneously, by the same impugned order, dismissed the applications i.e. I.A. No. 4099 of 2021 and 3015 of 2021 filed by the Appellant recording the following reasons which read as under:- "24. That after going through the objections made by the Operational Creditors, and examining the reply given by the RP and CoC, this bench observes that as per Section 30(2)(b) of IBC, 2016, the higher of the following amount is required to be paid to the Operational Creditors ie the amount to be paid to such creditors in the event of a liquidation of the corporate debtor under section 53; or the amount that would have been paid to such creditors, if the amount to be distributed under the resolution plan had been distributed in accordance with the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h was dismissed on 07.10.2019 and it was stated that relinquishment charges has to be paid as decided under petition no. 92/MP/2015. It is alleged that the Corporate Debtor is thus liable to pay an amount of Rs. 2643,54,00,000/- to the Appellant. 15. The Corporate Debtor filed an appeal No. 436/2019 before the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) against the aforesaid order which is pending adjudication. It is alleged that APTEL, vide order dated 08.10.2020 specifically permitted the Appellant to pursue claims on the generators where CIRP proceedings are pending, therefore, the Appellant filed its claim in Form B to Respondent No. 1 who adjusted the same as Rs. 1 and rest as contingent claim on the ground of pendency of appeal before the APTEL. 16. Counsel for the Appellant has submitted that Respondent No. 1 is suppose to make the best estimate of the claim filed before him as per Regulation 14 of the IBBI (CIRP) Regulations, 2016 (in short 'Regulations") if the same is not precise but cannot estimate the claim at Rs. 1. It is submitted that the amount is precise and therefore, the claim of the Appellant cannot be adjudicated at Rs. 1 and hence, Respondent No. 1 has erred ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... also submitted that the total payout under the approved resolution plan is Rs. 2500 Cr. which would also get exhausted in payment of the CIRP costs and the dues owed to the secured financial creditors. It is therefore submitted that the resolution plan cannot be considered to be in violation of Section 30(2)(e) of the Code keeping in view the fact that the liquidation value due to the operational creditors is NIL and even if the amount received under the approved resolution is to be was distributed in accordance with the priorities set out in Section 53(1) of the Code and thus, the operational creditors would be paid NIL. 22. It is further submitted that there is no inequitable or unfair treatment meted out to the operational creditors of the CD, the CoC made every possible effort towards protecting the interest of all stakeholders and has approved the best available resolution plan. It is submitted that out of the two resolution plans placed before the Coc for their approval while the resolution plan submitted by SRA provided for an overall payout of Rs. 2500 Cr. towards the stakeholders with an additional commitment of upto Rs. 1100 Cr. towards inter alia investment in the CD t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he case of Pratap Technocrats (p) Ltd. Vs. Monitoring Committee of Reliance Infratel Ltd. & Anr., Civil Appeal No. 676 of 2021 it has been held that once the requirement of Section 30(2)(b) of the Code is fulfilled, the proposal under a resolution plan is statutorily treated as fair and equitable which cannot be made subject matter of judicial review since the provisions of the Code do not confer any equity based jurisdiction of the AA or this Appellate Tribunal. 25. It is also submitted that the claim of the Appellant has rightly been classified as contingent because it is dependent upon a decision of an appeal which is pending adjudication before APTEL. 26. We have heard Counsel for the parties and perused the record with their able assistance. 27. The facts are not much in dispute and the only issue is about the treatment meted out to the operational creditors in the resolution plan which has been approved by the Adjudicating Authority. As per the chart (Supra), as against the admitted claim of the secured financial creditors of Rs. 120,129,831,567/- the amount provided in the resolution plan is Rs. 2500 Cr. which is only to the extent of 20.098 %, therefore, the claim of the....