TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 383
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arantors, as against the financial assistance, which was extended to the Corporate Debtor M/s. Unitek Power Solutions India Limited by M/s. JM Financials Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd., the financial creditor, who initiated proceedings under Section 95 of the I & B Code, 2016, as against the Appellant, the personal guarantors herein. 3. It is an admitted case by the Appellants, i.e., the personal guarantors, that as the consequence of the admission of the Section 95 application under the I & B Code, the Appellants have been put to face the personal insolvency process by an order that was passed by the Learned NCLT on 17.03.2022 in respective Company Petitions, which are chronologically detailed hereunder: - (i) CP(IBC)/13/KOB/2021, (ii) CP(IBC)/17/KOB/2021, (iii) CP(IBC)/15/KOB/2021, (iv) CP(IBC)/16/KOB/2021 & (v) CP(IBC)/19/KOB/2021. The respective orders were passed under Section 95 of the I & B Code, admitting the Personal Guarantors into personal insolvency process. The said orders dated 17.03.2022 under Section 100 of the I & B Code have attained finality and have not been subjected to challenge, any further by any of the Appellants. Here, even in these Company ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... provisions of Section 107 of the Code to consider the repayment plan, that was submitted by the Appellants. The Committee of Creditors met on 21.11.2022 to consider the repayment plan of Rs.21 Crores submitted by each of the personal guarantors and found it not acceptable. The CoC met subsequently on 02.12.2022 and on 18.01.2023 and on the ground that the personal guarantors could not come up with a modified repayment plan as specified, decided to reject the repayment plan with 100% voting and directed Resolution Professional to file report under Section 112 for order of Learned NCLT. On filing of the report under Section 112, Learned NCLT after conducting the proceedings hearing the parties and perusing the documents, passed order on 28.06.2023 rejecting the Repayment Plan submitted under Section 106 of the Code. 7. The prime ground taken by the Appellant for questioning the propriety of the report of Resolution Professional is that under the personal insolvency process, a group insolvency of all the personal guarantors by a collective consideration of the repayment plan is not contemplated and as such each repayment plan as submitted by the respective personal guarantors unde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....repayment plans which were submitted in accordance with Section 105 of the I & B Code, and were respectively subject matter of consideration in the respective interlocutory applications being IA(IBC)114/KOB/2023, IA(IBC)116/KOB/2023, IA(IBC)/115/KOB/2023, IA(IBC)118/KOB/2023 & IA(IBC)119/KOB/2023 have been erroneously considered by the Learned Tribunal and disposed of by the common order by treating it as if they engaged consideration of a common subject matter, which the Appellants contends that otherwise according to the facts on record, each of the repayment plan application furnished by the respective corporate guarantors independently under Section 105 of the I & B Code, 2016, since being independent and distinct to each other, they ought to have been independently considered and should not have been consolidated, while taking a call on the respective Interlocutory Applications preferred under Section 105 of the I & B Code. 10. In a nutshell, it could be summed up that the prime ground of challenge as given by the Appellant, to the impugned order of 28.06.2023, as respectively passed in each of the interlocutory applications detailed above preferred in Company Appeals, deci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d in the meeting, that was held on 21.11.2022. Hence, it cannot be said that the spirit of the Judgment of Vijay Kumar Jain (supra), as referred to, was not followed, particularly when the respective plans were individually deliberated upon and considered by the Resolution Professional in the meeting which was held under Sub- Section (3) & Sub-Section (4) of Section 106 of the I & B Code, 2016. On perusal of the impugned order, if we go into the observation and the findings which has been made, it reflects that the determination, has been made on each of the respective repayment plan, with an independent exercise of commercial wisdom based upon the consideration of the terms of respective repayment plans, and thus it met with the very objective of personal insolvency process and it was not a group insolvency, as it has been attempted to be portrayed by the Appellants in the appeal in question. 12. We, after giving a thoughtful consideration to the arguments extended by the Learned Counsel for the Appellants and particularly in the light of the findings that has been recorded by the Learned Tribunal in the impugned order, come to the conclusion that, even the Learned Tribunal, wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the I & B Code, 2016, before Learned NCLT for orders. 14. At this appellate stage, the arguments that have been extended by the Learned Counsel for the Appellants in the light of the ground, which had been taken by the Appellant in the instant Company Appeals, will have to be read in the context of the adjudication sought to be made to the respective IAs preferred by each of the Appellants for the purpose of consideration of the repayment plan, as submitted under Section 105 of the I & B Code. The instant Company Appeals have to be confined to be considered in the light of the argument extended by the Learned Counsel for the Appellants qua the consideration of the repayment plan only and in the light of the minutes recorded in the various meetings which were held, as observed in the impugned order, where despite of the assurance granted, the personal guarantors have not attempted to modify their repayment plans. In that eventuality, the Learned Tribunal did not have any other option, but to exercise its power under Section 114(1) of the I & B Code and to reject the repayment plan, and that is what has been arrived at by the impugned order, where the Learned Tribunal, after gi....