TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 1454
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....A No. 252/2026, preferred in CP(IB) No. 97/07/HDB/2018. 2. The effect of the impugned order dated 05.02.2026 has been that the said IA, as preferred by the Appellant, seeking a denovo restoration and revival of the CIRP process, has been laid to rest. The facts, which could be derived from the records placed before this Appellate Tribunal are, that the legal status of the Appellant, admittedly happens to be that of a Erstwhile Resolution Professional who, at the stage when he has filed the instant company appeal enjoyed the status of being the Chairman and the Member of the Monitoring Committee. 3. The Resolution plan was submitted by Respondent No.2, i.e. a consortium of M/s. Fortuna Engi Tech and Structurals (India) Private Limited and Mr. Prasanna Sai Raghuveer Kandula, Mr. Tadimella Rajakishore and M/s. Murgud Vincom Private Limited. 4. The Corporate Debtor was directed to be placed under CIRP by virtue of an order dated 09.07.2018 passed by the Adjudicating authority. The Resolution Plan, which was submitted by Respondent No. 2, was approved by 99.53% of voting in the meeting of the CoC, which was held on 11.02.2020. The total value of the Resolution Plan amounted to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sent Applicant as Resolution Professional by directing the Successful Resolution Applicant to hand over possession, custody and control of the assets, records and affairs of the Corporate Debtor to the Resolution Professional so appointed, consequently thereafter direct issuance of a fresh Form G for invitation of Expressions of Interest; and ii. Pass such other order/orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case." 9. The consequential effect of the relief sought for in IA No. 252/2026, as extracted above, would be that an attempt was made by the Appellant, to seek a restoration of the CIRP, which otherwise under law has already stood culminated with the approval of the Resolution Plan, and later after failure of resolution process with initiation of liquidation. More importantly while seeking the restoration of CIRP process the appellant also sought his appointment as a Resolution Professional. It is important to note that RP himself had initiated liquidation proceedings by filing of IA No. 15/2024, which was restored at his behest on his application, being Restoration Application No. 1/2025 and after allowing o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....yment plan schedule, have failed to comply it, and if the said plan was permitted to be implemented, it would have resulted into the revival of the Corporate Debtor. And at that juncture, based on that anticipated analogy, the Ld. Tribunal expressed that the application could be allowed for the purposes of availing of an arrangement between the Successful Resolution Applicants. 13. Looking to the nature of relief, which was sought in IA No. 2301/2024, as extracted in the order of 03.12.2024, which has been taken by the Appellant, to be interpreted, as if the Ld. Tribunal was of the opinion that there could be a possibility of revival of the Corporate Debtor, and the liquidation should be resorted to as a last recourse, was under these circumstances where the members of the Consortium of Successful Resolution Applicant had expressed that there could be a possibility of implementation of the re-scheduled plan. Based upon the said possibility, a liberty was granted to enforce the schedule plan, which ultimately failed. However, it reserved the right for revival of the liquidation proceedings filed by the Appellant, himself by way of IA No. 15/2024. 14. We are of the opinion, tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Beck and Peter Vermoenesverwaltung Limited & Another, and particularly he has drawn the attention of this Appellate Tribunal to the observations made in para 13 of the said judgment. The same is extracted hereunder: - "13. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant SBI has finally urged that this Tribunal has the inherent power under rule 11 of NCLAT Rules, 2016 to pass orders necessary for meeting the ends of justice. He has claimed that since the previously Approved Resolution Plan has failed, the company under insolvency resolution should not be allowed to go into liquidation which would mean corporate death of the company and therefore, in the interest of fairness and justice to stakeholders of the Corporate Debtor, this Tribunal has the power to direct re- initiating the insolvency resolution process of Corporate Debtor after setting aside the order dated 2.2.2021 of the Adjudicating Authority, with a further period of 90 days provided to there-instated Resolution Professional to invite EOIs and complete the insolvency resolution process of the Corporate Debtor." 17. The observation made therein was in context to the subject as to what would be the scope and ambi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ill not be applicable as attempted to be applied by the Appellant in the instant case. 20. The Ld. Counsel for the Appellant had further made reference to yet another judgment as rendered in Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 2012- 2013/2024 in the matters of Darwin Platform Infrastructure Limited v. Union Bank of India and particularly in the said case, the Ld. Counsel for the Appellant has made reference to para 14 and 15 of the said judgment. The same is extracted hereunder: - "14. We may further notice that appellant before the Adjudicating Authority as well as before this Tribunal has submitted that appellant is still ready to deposit amount, when the appellant has failed to deposit the amount within the timeline, it is not open for the appellant to deposit the amount at the stage when the application was filed or in the hearing of the appeal. Consequences of non-adhering to the timelines in the resolution plan, cannot be reversed after considerable lapse of time, and specially, when not even first tranche of payment has been made by the SRA." "15. We are of the view that Adjudicating Authority has rightly after considering the submissions of the parties t....