Supreme Court Upholds NCLAT Order, Dismisses Insolvency Appeal and Disposes of All Pending Applications.CIRP - Jurisdiction of the Adjudicating Authority to direct consideration of a settlement proposal after approval of a Resolution Plan. - Appellant (Successful Resolution Applicant - SRA) submits that after approval of Resolution Plan of the Appellant by the CoC, there was no occasion for directing consideration of fresh settlement proposal submitted by Ex. Directors to be placed before the CoC - It was held by NCLAT that The Adjudicating Authority, ought to have allowed opportunity to SRA to re... ... ... Issues Involved:
The Supreme Court upheld the impugned order passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No 287 of 2024.

Details of the Judgment:

Issue 1: Impugned Order
The Supreme Court found no reason to interfere with the impugned order dated 28 February 2024 passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No 287 of 2024. The Court dismissed the Civil Appeal accordingly.

Issue 2: Pending Applications
The Court also mentioned that any pending applications, if any, stand disposed of as a result of the judgment. CIRP - Jurisdiction of the Adjudicating Authority to direct consideration of a settlement proposal after approval of a Resolution Plan. - Appellant (Successful Resolution Applicant - SRA) submits that after approval of Resolution Plan of the Appellant by the CoC, there was no occasion for directing consideration of fresh settlement proposal submitted by Ex. Directors to be placed before the CoC - It was held by NCLAT that The Adjudicating Authority, ought to have allowed opportunity to SRA to respond to the Application (IA No.188 of 2024 filed by Respondent Nos.1 and 2), whose Resolution Plan has been approved by the CoC and which is pending consideration before the Adjudicating Authority. Without giving an opportunity to the Appellant, direction to the CoC to consider the Plan, cannot be sustained. HELD THAT:- There are no reason to interfere with the impugned order - appeal dismissed. Pratham Expofab Private Limited and Another Versus One City Infrastructure Pvt Ltd and Others Respondents
Insolvency and Bankruptcy
2024 (5) TMI 893 - SC Order - TMI
SUPREME COURT - LB - SC
Dated:- 26-4-2024
Civil Appeal No. 5161 of 2024 - -
Insolvency & Bankruptcy
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE DR DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD , HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA And HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA For the Appellant : Mr. Nakul Dewan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mrinal Harsh Vardhan, Adv. Mr. Dawneesh Shaktivats, AOR Mr. Kailash Ram, Adv. Mr. Yougender Singh, Adv. Ms. Himanshi Mehta, Adv. Mr. Rajat Bawaniwal, Adv. Ms. Amrita Jha, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. Sunil Fernandes, Sr. Adv. Mr. Nishant Verma, Adv. Ms. Rajshree Chaudhari, Adv. Ms. Diksha Dadu, Adv. Mr. Siddharth V., Adv. Ms. Anuja Pethia, AOR ORDER 1. We find no reason to interfere with the impugned order dated 28 February 2024 passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No 287 of 2024. 2. The Civil Appeal is accordingly dismissed. 3. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
Case laws, Decisions, Judgements, Orders

Contact Us At :

FAQs :

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

2024 (5) TMI 893