Classic Enterprises vs Duncans Industries Limited

IN THE MATTER OF: Classic Enterprises & Ors. ...Appellants

Versus

Duncans Industries Ltd. Through RP Ram Ratan Modi ...Respondent

Present: For Appellants : Mr. Shaunak Mitra, Mr. Manish Paliwal, Ms. Megha Yadav, Ms. Kapila Bishnoi, Advocates. For Respondent : Mr. Joy Saha, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Urmila, Mr. Amit Kasera, Advocates.

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

26.03.2025: Heard Shri Shaunak Mitra, learned counsel for the

Appellants and Shri Joy Saha, learned counsel appearing for the Resolution

Professional. This appeal has been filed against order passed by the

Adjudicating Authority dated 18.10.2024 approving the Resolution Plan of the

Corporate Debtor - Duncans Industries Ltd.

2. The Appellants before us are Financial/Operational Creditors who

claim that they have provided their finance/services to the Corporate Debtor

during CIRP. It is submitted that an application was filed by the Appellants

before the Adjudicating Authority in July, 2024 which application is still

pending and the Adjudicating Authority has approved the Resolution Plan on

18.10.2024 without deciding the application.

Cont'd.../ 2

3. Learned counsel for the Resolution Professional submits that the plan

was approved by the CoC on 01.03.2022 and the application for plan approval

was heard and reserved on 21.01.2024 and applications by the Appellants

have been filed thereafter. Learned counsel for the Resolution Professional

submits that there is no merit in the applications since no claims were filed

in time.

4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. In so far as challenge to plan approval order dated 18.10.2024 is

concerned, we see no reason to entertain appeal at the instance of the

Appellants who were not stakeholders in the CIRP. Learned counsel for the

Resolution Professional submits that the plan itself refers to CIRP cost and

provides for an amount of Rs.11.50 Crores and refers to Clause 1.1 and 2.1.2

of Para 2.1 Part B of the Resolution Plan. Learned counsel for the Resolution

Professional submits that the clauses clearly provide for the payment of

actuals.

6. As submitted by learned counsel for the Appellants, the applications

being still pending before the Adjudicating Authority, we are not required to

express any opinion on the merits of the applications in this appeal. We,

however, are of the view that at the instance of the Appellants no grounds

have been made out to entertain challenge to the Resolution Plan of the

Corporate Debtor. We, thus, are of the view that the challenge to the approval

of Resolution Plan at the instance of Appellants' deserve to be dismissed.

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.63 of 2025 3

7. We, however, observe that this order shall not preclude the Adjudicating

Authority to consider and take decision on the applications pending before

the Adjudicating Authority. We make it clear that we are not entering into

submissions of either of the parties on merit of the pending applications in

this appeal and it is for the Adjudicating Authority to consider all the issues

and take decision in accordance with law.

8. Subject to above, Appeal is dismissed.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)

[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) Archana/nn

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.63 of 2025