2026 (1) TMI 161

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....H) (INS) No. 452 / 2025 are that; 1. A proceeding under Section 7 of I & B Code, 2016, stood initiated as against the Corporate Debtor (CD) i.e. M/s. Splendid Metal Products Limited (later on rechristened as M/s. Thalaivar Steels Limited) and Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) stood commenced as against the Corporate Debtor by an order of 04.04.2019 that, was passed in CP (IB) No. 666/ 7 / HDB / 2018, by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority. Subsequently, the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) was appointed and the IRP issued a public announcement in 'Form A', on 17.04.2019 inviting claims from the Creditors and other Stakeholders in respect of the CD. Thereafter, in accordance with the provisions of Regulation 27 of IBBI (Insol....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....4.2021. 4. The approved Resolution Plan had a financial outlay of Rs. 700 Crore out of which Rs. 4,47,10,60,000/- was to be paid to the Financial Creditors in seven instalments, effective from 18.06.2021. However, out of the schedule instalments, that were required to be paid, the Appellant remitted only the first three instalments and that too, with considerable delay. The 3rd instalment of Rs. 50 Crore due to be paid on 18.06.2023 was paid on 21.11.2024 and thereafter no further instalments have been paid even though the same were to be paid on 18.06.2024 (Rs.50 Crore), 18.06.2025 (Rs.62 Crore), 18.06.2026 (Rs. 62 Crore) and 18.06.2026 (Rs. 110.306 Crore) respectively. 5. The Financial Creditors, to the Corporate Debtor also execute....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Appellant because, they were not the necessary party in the liquidation proceedings. 9. It is against this order that the instant Company Appeal has been filed. The Appellant contends that any order passed on IA (IBC) (Liq) / 08 / 2025 would affect their rights, as the Plan had already been approved in their favour by the CoC on 28.09.2020 and by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority on 08.04.2021. Hence, they argue that they were entitled to a hearing, failing which the action would violate principles of natural justice. 10. The said request has been strongly opposed by the Respondent on the ground that the initiation of liquidation proceedings was necessitated due to the Appellant's default as the Successful Resolution Applicant. As such, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....under the Plan, that he has admittedly defaulted, after remitting 3 instalments only and that due to this default, liquidation proceedings have been initiated. 15. Since only three instalments were paid and the remaining instalments are yet to be paid with 4th and 5th instalments being clearly overdue in spite of reminders by Banks, this default justifies the filing of the liquidation application. Hence, the Appellant being in clear default, was not required to be made a party or heard in the proceedings for appointment of the Liquidator. 16. The Appellant's contention that he was entitled to be heard in the liquidation application because his rights are being affected and the default is also due to certain actions of the Financial Cr....