TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 68
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Brief relevant facts are as follows: 2. M/s Swati Health and Education Services Private Limited was allotted 20000 sq. mtrs. of the land on lease basis by Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (GNIDA) in Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh vide a lease on 26.06.2013. M/s Swati Health and Education Services Private Limited defaulted to pay the instalments as per schedule/reschedule and GNIDA issued default notice and show cause notice raising the demand for the defaulted amount against premium, additional compensation and lease rent and penalties for time extension related to the completion of construction. 3. In another development on a petition filed under Section 7 by one of the Financial Creditor namely Eclear Leasing and Finance Private Limited. The CIR proceedings were initiated against M/s Swati Health and Education Services Private Limited vide order dated 04.03.2022 in CP (IB) No. 1035/ND/2020. 4. The Appellant herein i.e. GNIDA had submitted a claim of Rs. 21,41,95,542/- with the Resolution Professional in regard to the CIR Proceedings against the Corporate Debtor - M/s Swati Health and Education Services Private Limited. However, the RP admitted only an ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d, c) Pass an order staying the proceeding in CP (IB) No. 1035/2020 during pendency of the present Appeal; and d) Pass an order granting such other and further reliefs as this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit in the interest of justice. 9. The main ground of the Appellant is that the Adjudicating Authority has failed to consider the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India qua consideration of the authority as a secured Operational Creditor. Appellant claims that prevailing law post Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority versus Prabhjot Singh Soni and another favors the Appellant herein, and the issue stands settled so far as the claim of the present Appellant as a secured creditor. In Civil Appeal No. 7590-7591 of 2023 of case titled as Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority Vs Prabhjit Singh Soni & Anr., the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held the Appellant Authority as a Secured Operational Creditor even though, by virtue of Section 13-A of the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Area Development Act, 1976. The Appellant GNIDA had submitted the proof of claim of Rs. 21.42 crores (approximately) with the resolution professional. However, only an ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed by the Resolution Professional is 18.24 Cr, and finally the amount approved for the Appellant in the Resolution Plan is 6.79 Cr. The amount as claimed the Appellant was that of a "Lessor Authority", which derived its right as a "Secured Creditor" from the Statutory lease. Non-Consideration of claim as secured creditor is not only against the law but would also grave miscarriage of justice as the Appellant being a Public Authority and runs on the Public Money. 14. As multiple petitions and appeals were involved in this case, we have tried to capture all the IAs and appeals in a single chart as follows: 15. Now it will be instructive to look into the sequence of events in this case to decide the appeal of Appellant-Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority. 16. Based on an Application under Section 7 of the Code, by one of the Financial Creditors, namely E-Clear Leasing and Finance Private Limited, in Company Petition IB-1035/ND/2020, the Corporate Debtor, namely, M/s. Swati Health and Education Services Private Limited, went into CIRP vide an order dated 4th March 2022, as per the orders of NCLT, New Delhi. 17. The Appellant in this case, GNIDA, had submitted its....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... applicant filed another interlocutory application [IA No. 1454/2024] seeking a direction that the monitoring committee should not take coercive steps against SRA. In this IA the Adjudicating Authority vide Order dated 02.04.2024 directed the Appellant- Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority to accept payment deposited in the escrow account within 3 days and also directed SRA to implement the plan within 30 days of the order. 23. However, GNIDA filed another IA No. 3918 of 2024 seeking the recall of this order of 2.04.2024. However, the same was dismissed by the Adjudicating Authority vide order dated 3 October 2024. In the same order of 3rd October 2024, in another I.A. No. 2233/2024, which was filed by the SRA in the same CP, seeking directions to GNIDA to comply with the resolution plan and withdraw the money kept in the escrow account, was allowed by the Adjudicating Authority. 24. However, GNIDA challenged the resolution plan before this Appellate Tribunal in CA (AT) (Ins.) No.284/2024, but this was dismissed vide order dated 21.02.2024 of this Appellate Tribunal on the grounds of limitation. 25. We note that Adjudicating Authority had disposed of IA No. 2233/....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ery vehemently argued by the Appellant - Greater Noida Authority, in Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority v. Prabhjit Singh Soni was delivered on February 12, 2024. And moreover, the challenge to the approval of the resolution plan was rejected on 21.02.2024 on the grounds of limitation in CA (AT) (Ins.) No.284/2024, as has been noted by us here in earlier. And later on, when the Adjudicating Authority directed the Appellant to accept the amount of the SRA for implementation of the resolution plan, from the escrow account in its order dated 02.04.2024, the Appellant filed an IA seeking the recall of this order. This recall Interlocutory Application No. 2233/2024, was also dismissed on 03.10.2024. Against the dismissal of the recall Interlocutory Application, the Appellant filed an appeal CA (AT) (Ins.) No. 320/2025 with this Appellate Tribunal. 31. While disposing of this appeal CA (AT) (Ins.) No. 320/2025, this tribunal had ordered as follows: "Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 320/2025 1. Heard Learned Counsel Mr. U.N. Singh appearing for the Appellant. 2. This Appeal has been filed against an Order dated 03.10.2024 passed by the Adjudicating Authority ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Kumar Mittal, in Union Bank of India, Khari Baouli, Delhi- 110006, in terms of the Order dated 02.04.2024 as passed by this Ld. Adjudicating Authority in full and final satisfaction of its claim against the Corporate Debtor; c) direct the Respondent No.1 to cooperate, assist and support the Applicant for grant of various approvals and consents in terms of the approved Resolution Plan; d) pass any further order in favour of the Applicants that this Hon'ble Adjudicating Authority deems fit under the facts and circumstances of the present case. Mr. U.N. Singh, Ld. Counsel for the Respondent i.e. Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority argued with vehemence that in terms of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority v. Prabhjit Singh Soni &s Anr. [Civil Appeal Nos. 7590-7591 of 2023], the Respondent need to treated as secured creditor and the amount deposited by the SRA in escrow account is not in proportion to what is payable to the Respondent as per the law declared by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority v. Prabhjit Singh Soni & Anr. (Civil Appeal Nos. 7590-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he said order has become final, and the amount which has been deposited as per the resolution plan is entitled to be received by the Appellant. 33. We also note that this dismissal in CA (AT) (Ins.) No.320 of 2025 was challenged by the Appellant in Civil Appeal No.7473/2025 before the Honourable Supreme Court of India, which dismissed the Appeal as per the following order: "1. Having heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant, Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority, and having gone through the materials on record, we find no good reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi. 2. The civil appeal is accordingly dismissed. 3. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of." 34. In the present appeal before this Appellate Tribunal, the Appellant - the Greater Noida Authority, vide CA(AT)Ins No. 322/2025, is seeking to set aside the order dated 03.10.2024 passed in IA No. 3918/2024 and prays to allow the application. 35. From the facts and circumstances of the case, we note that the SRA has tried to implement the resolution plan but h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....upreme Court of India, and now this is being re-challenged before this appellate tribunal. 40. We find that no new facts have been brought before us. The Appeal is challenging the same set of issues which have been challenged earlier, and the earlier Orders have attained finality. Against the principles of res-judicata the Appellant is re-agitating the issue and upset the Insolvency Resolution Proceedings. The Appellant has not been acting to withdraw the amount from the escrow account and issue the challan for implementation of the resolution plan. 41. The matter was earlier reserved for orders on 20-03-2026. However, it was brought to our notice that the Respondent No.2/SRA has not paid the only Financial Creditor of the CD, even though the resolution plan was approved way back in 2023. Respondent No. 2/SRA sought one month's time to make the entire payment to the Financial Creditor. In this order, it was also noted that the Appellant was willing to withdraw the sum available with the escrow account with all the accrued interest. It was only required to furnish a challan for the said purpose to the monitoring committee. The relevant portion of the order of this Appellat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....olution plan. The SRA claims that the resolution plan submitted by the Applicant/SRA was duly approved by the COC on 25.11.2022 and thereafter approved by the Adjudicating Authority on 24.08.2023. The said approval has attained finality, having been upheld by this Appellate Tribunal. Pursuant to the approved resolution plan, the applicant has already demonstrated its bona fides by: • depositing an amount of Rs. 6.79 crores towards the dues of GNIDA in an escrow account • incurring CIRP costs of approximately Rs. 1 crore • furnishing a bank guarantee of Rs. 2.55 crores 44. The Applicant/SRA contends that, despite the above, the implementation of the resolution plan has been hindered solely on account of the conduct of GNIDA, which has failed to accept the resolution plan amount, issue the requisite No Objection Certificate, and the position of the Corporate Debtor. 45. The applicant states that in the hearing dated 20.03.2026, certain submissions made by the counsel for the Financial Creditor, who is not a party to the present proceedings, led to an erroneous recording by this Appellate Tribunal that the applicant has not made payment and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f Monitoring Committee Y+7 Payment to Pending CIRP Cost X+90 Payment to Financial Creditors (unsecured) X+90 Payment to Operational Creditors (unsecured other creditors) X+90 Payment to Operational Creditors (other than Workmen & Employees) X+90 48. On the other hand, the Erstwhile Resolution Professional and the chairman of the monitoring committee, relying on above indicated timelines for the implementation of the resolution plan, have brought to our notice that the resolution plan was to be implemented within 90 days from the approval date. Further, the SRA has not paid the fees and expenses of the monitoring committee as per the terms of the resolution plan. There is still an outstanding amount of fees and expenses of the monitoring committee amounting to Rs. 47,16,010, which has been shared with the counsel of the SRA on 20/03/2026. The erstwhile resolution professional also brings to our notice that the approved resolution plan is unconditional and has attained finality, but the SRA has not implemented the approved resolution plan as per the terms of the plan and specific directions of the NCLT as per order dated 02.04.2024. The erstwhile resolut....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the GNIDA has not been cooperating in the implementation of the resolution plan and is derailing the successful implementation of the approved resolution plan in the guise of various applications and appeals. For this reason, we deem it appropriate to impose a cost of Rs. 1 lakh on GNIDA. We also direct GNIDA to assist in the immediate implementation of all the directions issued by this Appellate Tribunal/NCLT for implementation of the resolution plan. 54. Furthermore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any merit in the interlocutory application filed by the applicant/SRA in IA No. 2364 of 2026, which makes their Resolution Plan to be conditional, and we reject the prayers in this IA. Orders 55. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the CA (AT) (Ins.) No. 322 of 2025 is dismissed. The interlocutory application filed by the Applicant/SRA in IA No. 2364 of 2026 is also dismissed. We also direct the Appellant to comply with the direction issued to make sure that the resolution plan is implemented and accept the resolution plan amount, issue the requisite No Objection Certificate. Further the Appellant is imposed a cost of Rs. 1 lakh to be deposit....