2026 (1) TMI 727

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 544/2025 (IA Nos. 1526, 1527, 1528 & 1529/2025) - -<br>Insolvency & Bankruptcy<br>JUSTICE SHARAD KUMAR SHARMA MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND JATINDRANATH SWAIN MEMBER (TECHNICAL) For the Appellants : Mr. Asad Hussain, Advocate For the Respondent : None ORDER Oral Judgment : Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, Member (Judicial): 1. These are a set of three Company Appeals, namely Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 533 / 2025, Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 534 / 2025, and Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 544 / 2025. However, for the sake of brevity, each of them is being dealt with independently. 2. Since they involve identical questions of fact and law, a common consideration is required. A) Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 53....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or in proceedings held before the Ld. Adjudicating Authority, wherein the Corporate Debtor chose not to file a counter and instead raised objections through written submissions. If there were any grievances against the approved Resolution Plan, they could only have been raised by the Corporate Debtor, represented by its Suspended Board / Directors. The shareholders, independently, have no right under law to maintain an Appeal under Section 61 of the Code against an order approving a Resolution Plan. 7. This principle has been propounded by the Larger Bench of this Appellate Tribunal in Park Energy Private Limited v. State Bank of India & Anr., Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 62 / 2023, wherein it was observed that shareholders, in the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....made in IA (IBC) / 13 / 2024. The Applicants therein had preferred the said application under Section 65 of the Code, read with Rules 11 and 34 of the NCLT Rules, 2016, seeking the reliefs detailed therein. 13. Primarily, the sole contention of the Appellants was that appropriate action be taken against Respondent No. 2 or any other person under Section 65 of the Code for initiating malicious proceedings before the Ld. Adjudicating Authority. 14. The Ld. Tribunal, after considering the rival contentions and upon exchange of pleadings, observed that IA (IBC) / 288 / 2023, filed by M/s. Kanti Conductors Private Limited and decided on 29.11.2023, sought almost similar reliefs, which had already been dismissed. The Tribunal had denied exc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lication, IA No. 1529 / 2025 stands allowed and the delay stands condoned. 20. The order under challenge pertains to the dismissal of the Intervention Petition (IBC) / 1 / 2024, preferred in IA (IBC) / 376 / 2023, by the Ld. Tribunal on 30.01.2025. The Applicants had invoked Section 60(5) of the I & B Code, 2016, read with Rules 11 and 34 of the NCLT Rules, 2016, seeking to implead themselves as parties to IA (IBC) / 376 / 2023, which is the Plan Approval Application. 21. The Ld. Tribunal rejected the said request in light of the decision dated 29.11.2023 rendered in IA (IBC) / 288 / 2023, preferred by M/s. Kanti Conductors Private Limited. The Ld. Tribunal observed that the Adjudicating Authority is empowered only to scrutinize the p....