Alpha Corp Development Pvt. Ltd vs Atul Kumar Kansal. Rp Of Universal ...
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1102 of 2019
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The order contains reasoning on two points, so I give two ratios. First, a prospective resolution applicant cannot confine its resolution plan to a part of the corporate debtor's projects where the corporate insolvency resolution process extends to the whole of the debtor's business and the other projects carry larger liabilities; the process is not limited to the projects the applicant chooses to bid for. Second, a resolution plan that is not submitted within the time allowed, and a partial-project proposal that is rejected by the Committee of Creditors, cannot be accepted, and an appeal seeking relief from the Adjudicating Authority's refusal to entertain such a proposal fails where no basis for interference is shown.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
M/s. Alpha Corp Development Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant
Versus
Atul Kumar Kansal RP of Universal Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Sandeep Bhuraria, Ms. Mahima Malhotra and Mr. Monish Surindren, Advocates
For Respondent : Mr. Swapnil Gupta and Ms. Neelambika Singh, Advocates for the 'Resolution Professional'
ORDER
22.10.2019 The Appellant, claims to be a person who intends to file a
'resolution plan' for three projects. He submitted that the 'Resolution
Professional' had not provided the necessary information and documents and for
the said reason it could file the plan.
Learned counsel for the 'Resolution Professional' brought to our notice that
the 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process' is not limited to the three projects
and the large number of projects (total 7 projects) are there in the 'Corporate
Insolvency Resolution Process'. The Appellant intends to file 'resolution plan'
only for three projects, leaving aside those with more liabilities, which had been
noticed by the Adjudicating Authority. For the said reason, the application is
not entertained.
-2-
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties we find that the Appellant
has not filed 'resolution plan' within the time, and proposal be made is also
rejected by the 'Committee of Creditors' and for part project no such plan can be
accepted. As we are not inclined to give any relief, the appeal is dismissed. No
costs.
[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson
[ Justice A.I.S. Cheema ] Member (Judicial)
[ Kanthi Narahari ] Member (Technical) /ns/sk
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1102 of 2019
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free