AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1452
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed Counsels for the parties, we proceed to hear the instant Company Appeal itself on the merits. The instant Company Appeal is accompanied with an Interlocutory Application, being an application for seeking condonation of delay in refiling of the Company Appeal i.e., IA No.1612/2025. The number of days of delay that has been sought to be condoned is 8 days in refiling the Appeal. Having heard the Learned Counsels for the parties on the application and also having considered the grounds taken in the application, the delay of 8 days that has chanced in refiling of the Company Appeal would stand condoned. Accordingly, IA No.1612/2025 would stand disposed of. 2. The backdrop under which the controversy arises, is limited to the extent of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er on, a decision was taken in the 30th CoC meeting, whereby it was resolved with a majority vote of 98.37%, to withdraw the plan and to proceed with to liquidation of the Corporate Debtor. This decision of the 30th CoC meeting was challenged by the Appellant by filing IA No.855/2025 praying for to declare the minutes of the 30th CoC meeting to be illegal and void. The relief sought for by the Applicant in the said IA, as preferred on 23.05.2025, was as under: - "6. Relief(s) Sought:- It is therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to declare that: a) the minutes of 30th meeting of CoC of Maan Sarovar Properties Development Pvt. Ltd. deciding to liquidate the corporate debtor coupled with e-votin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hdraw the present application and this Hon'ble Tribunal may direct the Resolution Professional to refund the performance bank guarantee amount together with interest accrued thereon immediately." 5. In the relief sought as extracted above, the Appellant, the consortium of Successful Resolution Applicants, had sought for a refund of the Performance Bank Guarantee (PBG), alleging that it was payable to them along with the interest, which had accrued on it. It's from this stage that the dispute has emerged. By the impugned order, the Learned Adjudicating Authority has partially granted the relief as prayed for in the aforesaid memo for refunding the Performance Bank Guarantee (PBG,) which has been furnished in pursuance to the Letter of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at on refund of the Performance Bank Guarantee, no interest would be payable on it, the relevant Clause 1.9.1 of RFRP is extracted hereunder: - "Both participation fees and BBG including the future payments, if any, shall be refundable without any interest if Resolution Plan is not accepted by the CoC". 8. On a simpliciter reading of the aforesaid expression, it prescribes that the participation fee and the Performance Bank Guarantee (PBG) are made refundable, if the plan is not accepted, by the CoC, but with a rider that it would be without any interest. 9. We are of the view that, as far as the payment of interest on the Performance Bank Guarantee (PBG) is concerned, it would be subject to the condition that the aforesaid c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d sought, which were the subject matter of consideration before the Learned Tribunal. In the subsequent line of the impugned order, the Tribunal has only directed to refund the Performance Bank Guarantee only. It is self-imbibed in the order, that the relief which was sought by the Appellant in this Application for payment of the interest stood denied and only the limited or partial relief was granted which is for the payment of Performance Bank Guarantee (PBG). So, it cannot be said that the Learned Tribunal had not considered the aspect of interest even though the Successful Resolution Applicant has sought for and by reference there was a denial made by the Learned Tribunal and only part of the relief as claimed for by the Appellant with ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f hearing of the Company Appeal or even its subsequent withdrawal application filed by the Appellant will have no bearing as far as the merits of the instant Company Appeal is concerned, which has to be independently decided, exclusively, considering the merits of the impugned order of 10.09.2025. 13. Hence filing of the said recall application would not be relevant for the instant controversy, nor would it facilitate in deciding the appeal. We are not permitting the Appellant to develop his case, which has otherwise not been pleaded, on that basis, which is otherwise not relevant for the purposes of the instant Company Appeal. 14. Under the laws relating to contract, the terms and conditions of the contract that governs a monetary re....