TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (12) TMI 1200
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ocate for R1 Mr. Krishnendu Datta, Senior Advocate For Mr. Palash Taing, Ms. Priyanka Deshmukh, and Ms. Alina Merin Mathew, Counsels for R2/COC Mr. P.H. Arvindh Pandian, Senior Advocate For Mr. Pradeep Joy & Ms. Dharmya MS, Advocate for Impleadment JUDGMENT ( Hybrid Mode ) ( Per : Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma , Member ( Judicial ) These are 2 Company Appeals being Company Appeal (AT)(CH)(Ins) No. 342/2024, and Company Appeal (AT)(CH)(Ins) No.343/2024, as they are emanating from the Company Petition (IB) No. 296/7/HDB/2022, though from the orders independently passed on different Interlocutory Applications, but since factually the issue remains the same, they are being decided together. In order to, better elucidate the controversy we would be dealing with the facts of each of the Appeals independently. 1. Company Appeal (AT)(CH)(Ins) No. 342/2024, arises from the Impugned Order of 13.06.2024, as rendered on Intervention Application being IA No.20/2024, it was preferred in Company Petition (I.B) No. 296/7/HDB/2022, by virtue of the Impugned Order under challenge the application thus preferred by the Appellant has been rejected, on the ground since that in the Resolutio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lan for its reconsideration, so as to ensure and include the 100% repayment could be ensured to the Secured Financial Creditors and in addition to, the Revised Resolution Plan of certain Perspective Resolution Applicants and had also offered to distribute the available cash balance of the Corporate Debtor, in favour of the Secured Financial Creditors. For the purposes of considering the contents of the revised Resolution Plan a meeting was convened of the Committee of Creditors, in the absence of the other members of the Committee of Creditors. But, however, the processing and reconsideration of the Resolution Plan was extended, for its resubmission of the revised final Resolution Plan till 31.03.2024, However, the Appellant has sought certain clarifications wide his communication, of 07.03.2024, and on the aforesaid intervening communications on 13.03.2024, the Respondent extended the time granted for submission of the revised final Resolution Plan until 18.03.2024. It is the case of the Appellant that, they have submitted the Revised Resolution Plan also on 18.03.2024, wherein a value of INR 3,30,21,00,000 payable, along with the interest, on the deferred payment, was the prop....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....96/9/HDB/2022; B. Such other and/or further order/orders be passed as to this Hon'ble Tribunal deem fit and proper The said application has been rejected by the Impugned Order of 13.06.2024, against which the Appeal has been preferred through Ms. Lilly Francis, as counsel on Record to the Appeal. Initially the Appeal was accompanied with Condone Delay Application and the same was 'Allowed' by an order of 18.09.2024, and the delay was 'Condoned' and the Respondents were called upon to file their Counter Affidavit. The matter ever since then remained pending till it was listed today for orders. The Ld. Counsel for the Appellant, addressed the Appeal on merits. It is a settled principle of law that once a Resolution Plan has submitted by a perspective Resolution Applicant, and the same has been considered by the Committee of Creditors and rejected and when the rejection order is not put to challenge, the result would be that no legally enforceable right stands crystallised in favour of the Prospective Resolution Applicant, to get himself impleaded in the proceeding drawn by the Resolution Professional, for approval of the Resolution Plan, before the Ld. Adjudicating Aut....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uld stand allowed, the applicant intervener M/s Lulu International shopping malls Private Limited, is being permitted to intervene in the appeal. The Appellant herein, who is also the appellant of the appeal already decided by the aforesaid part of today's judgment who has put a challenge to the order passed on IA No. 1229/2024, as rendered in CP(IB)No. 296/7/HDB/2022. The factual part as far as the instant appeal is concerned, the same will remain similar up to the stage of filing of the application IA No.1229/2024, preferred by the appellant who has already been dealt with the above, and has been determined as to be an unsuccessful Resolution Applicant and whose Intervention Application has been rejected. Owing to the fact that the Appellant's Intervention Application has been rejected and its rejection has been affirmed by the Judgment rendered in Company Appeal AT CH (Ins) No. 342/2024 as decided today the limited question which would be required to be venture is as to whether, at all the Company Appeal AT CH (Ins) No. 343/2024, preferred by the Appellant whose intervention has been rejected as against the decision rendered on IA No. 1229/2024, could at all put a challe....