TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (10) TMI 397
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der of 11.06.2024, as it has been passed by the learned NCLT, New Delhi Bench, in a proceedings those were held under Section 30(6) to be read with Section 31 of I&B Code of 2016, along with Regulation 39(4) of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016. 2. The effect of the impugned Order had been that the learned Tribunal after considering the clarificatory letter dated 02.06.2022 in relation to the approved resolution plan submitted by M/s. Red Apple Buyers Welfare Association, had further proceeded to approve the resolution plan, by the impugned Order, resulting into the I.A. No.4219/ND/2022 being allowed. 3. The appellant questions the approval of the resolution plan that has been submitted by M/s. Red Apple Buyers Welfare Association i.e. respondent No.2 herein. The approval, which was carried by the COC was with 100% voting in its 18th meeting that was held on 23.05.2022. Subsequent to the modification to the resolution plan including upon consideration of the memorandum of understanding dated 08.11.2023, that was entered into with respondent No.3 - M/s. Windsor Paradise Heights Pvt. Ltd., the Ld. NC....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ferred to yet another judgement as rendered by this Tribunal in the matters of "Balkishan Shrikisan Baldawa vs. Agri-Tech (India) Limited and others" as it was rendered in CA (AT) (Ins) No. 970 of 2025. He submitted that owing to the fact that the Judgement of Park Energy Pvt. Ltd. (supra) which has been decided by larger Bench upon a reference being made in Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No.62 of 2023 due to two conflicting views of two coordinate Member Bench, since the same was considered in the subsequent Judgment of Balkishan Shrikisan Baldawa (supra) and the coordinate Bench has carved out an exception vide its Judgementof15.12.2025 pertaining to an exercise of fraud or collusion between the parties for initiation of insolvency proceedings. There could still be an exception where a proceeding in a company petition or in a company appeal would be maintainable, even at the behest of the shareholders. 7. We are afraid to accept this argument extended by the learned Counsel for the appellant, and the reason being that, so far as the matter pertaining to the Balkishan Shrikisan Baldawa (supra) is concerned, though it apparently seems to have been rendered by three Judges Bench,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der passed by the Tribunal. Evaluation of fraud even take for an example, if it is presumed to be there, though not substantially established herein by any specific documents, it cannot be accepted unless proved for the purposes to maintain a proceedings of the Company Appeal, by an assigned person, not a shareholder. As against the impugned order dated 11.06.2024, granting an approval of the resolution plan, owing to the fact that, no proceedings at the behest of the shareholder, the position of shareholder which is admitted by the appellant, would be maintainable, as he individually as being an exclusive shareholder cannot be brought within the ambit of the definition of an "aggrieved person", as prescribed under Section 61 of I&B Code, to treat himself to be an aggrieved person. 9. The impugned order of approval of the resolution plan was rendered by the learned Tribunal on 11.06.2024. All the documents, incidents and facts, which have been pleaded by the appellant, qua the impact of the memorandum of understanding as executed after the order of the Ld. NCLT dated 31.10.2023 were the facts which were already available and considered too at the stage when the plan was put for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... plan, they cannot step into the proceeding at the behest of the appellant, who exclusively only happens to be the shareholder, by stepping into the shoes of the proceedings and trying to portray their case pertaining to the rights, which they contend that they are likely to be hampered because of the approval of the plan. 13. The aforesaid facet about the rights of the shareholder has been settled by us in para - 16, 17 and 18 of the Judgment rendered by us in the matters of Park Energy and while affirming the view expressed by the three Member Bench of NCLAT in the matter of "M/s Clarion Health Food LLP v. Goli Vada Pav Pvt. Ltd.", Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.1522 of 2023, and also because of the Judgement in the matter of "GLAS Trust Company LLC v. BYJU Raveendran & Ors." (2024 SCC OnLine SC 3032)as recently rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court, it has already been settled that the issue of maintainability of the proceedings at the behest of shareholder is no more a question, which is res integra, relevant para - 16, 17 and 18 of Park Energy Pvt. Ltd. is extracted hereunder:- "16. We are of the considered view that when rendering a Judgment in an adjudicatory capacity....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ate Tribunal. "]. The use of the phrase "any person aggrieved" indicates that there is no rigid locus requirement to institute an appeal challenging an order of the National Company Law Tribunal, before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal or an order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, before this court. Any person who is aggrieved by the order may institute an appeal, and nothing in the provision restricts the phrase to only the applicant creditor and the corporate debtor. As noted above, once the corporate insolvency resolution process is initiated, the proceedings are no longer restricted to the individual applicant creditor and the corporate debtor but rather become collective proceedings (in rem), where all creditors, such as the appellant, are necessary stakeholders. The appellant is not an unrelated party to the corporate insolvency resolution process, but is in fact, an entity whose claims had been verified by the interim resolution professional vide letter dated August 19, 2024. The appellant who claims to be a financial creditor, has expressed reasonable apprehensions about the prejudice it would face if there were r....