Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Devsaria Iron & Steel Co.Pvt. Ltd vs Resolution Professional Of Perfect ...

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal15 February 2022Ashok Bhushan

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The allocation of value to an operational creditor under a resolution plan that has been approved by the Committee of Creditors with the requisite voting share is a matter of the commercial wisdom of the CoC, and the Appellate Tribunal will not interfere with that allocation in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 61. A Committee of Creditors is entitled to be presumed to have considered the materials placed before it, including a transaction audit report, before approving a resolution plan; absent material to the contrary, the Tribunal will not infer that such materials were left unexamined. The pendency of an application for a forensic audit before the Adjudicating Authority does not affect the validity of an approval of a resolution plan granted on the Resolution Professional's application after CoC approval, so no relief on that ground follows in the appeal.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNALPRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHICompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 144 of 2022

IN THE MATTER OF: Devsaria Iron and Steel Company Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant

Versus

Resolution Professional of Perfect Boring Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent Present: For Appellant: Mr. Akshay Amritanshu, Mr. Kartikey Singh, Mr. Ashutosh Jain and Mr. Amitabh, Advocates. For Respondent:

ORDER

(Virtual Mode)

15.02.2022: Heard learned counsel for the Appellant. This Appeal has

been filed against order dated 16.03.2021 passed by the Adjudicating

Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad,

Court 2 by which the Adjudicating Authority has allowed the application filed

by the Resolution Professional for approving the Resolution Plan submitted by

the Resolution Applicant.

2. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that Appellant was an

Operational Creditor and in the Resolution Plan he has been allocated only

1.5% of his dues. He further submits that Transaction Audit was done whose

report was also placed before the Committee of Creditors (CoC) but there was

no consideration of the said report and the Appellant's objection regarding the

aforesaid has not been considered. He submits that I.A. No. 308 of 2021 was

filed by him for conducting Forensic Audit, which is still pending before the

Adjudicating Authority and no order has been passed.

Cont'd.../ -2-

3. We have considered submissions of learned counsel for the Appellant

and perused the record.

4. The order impugned is the order by which Resolution Plan has been

approved. The allocation made to the Operational Creditor under the

Resolution Plan is the matter of commercial wisdom of the CoC and CoC

having approved the Resolution Plan with 96.37% vote share, we see no reason

to take any other view. In exercise of our jurisdiction under Section 61, the

amount allocated to the Operational Creditor could not be changed.

5. Insofar as the Transaction Audit, report was filed before the CoC. We

see no reason to come to conclusion that all materials that were before the

CoC were not looked into by the CoC before approving the Resolution Plan.

6. The application filed by the Appellant regarding Forensic Audit which is

said to be pending also does not have any effect on the approval of the

Resolution Plan by the Adjudicating Authority which approval has been

granted consequent to the application filed by the Resolution Professional after

approval by the CoC. We are of the view that no relief can be granted to the

Appellant in the present Appeal. Appeal is dismissed.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra] Member (Technical) Archana/nn

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 144 of 2022

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