Neeraj Kumar Sharma vs Bee Kay Precision India Pvt Ltd & Ors
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 586 of 2020
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The statutory period under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, once extended, having expired without the receipt of any resolution plan, the Adjudicating Authority's direction for liquidation of the corporate debtor follows as a necessary consequence and cannot be faulted. A resolution applicant's complaint that its plan was not considered cannot succeed where the record shows that no resolution plan was received by the Resolution Professional within the statutory period, the only expressions of interest received not having been followed by submission of any plan.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Neeraj Kumar Sharma ...Appellant
Versus
Bee Kay Precision (India) Pvt. Ltd & Ors. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant: Mr. Rahul Kapoor, Advocate For Respondents:
ORDER
(Through Virtual Mode)
21.07.2020: After hearing learned counsel for the Appellant for a while, we
find that since no Resolution Plan had been received by the Resolution
Professional before the expiry of the extended statutory period of 270 days, no
option was left but to send the Corporate Debtor into liquidation. The contention
raised on behalf of the Appellant that its Resolution Plan was not even
considered, does not find support from the record as in response to the public
announcement only two Expressions of Interest had been received by the
Resolution Professional but the prospective Resolution Applicants did not turn
up for submission of the Resolution Plans for the Corporate Debtor. In view of
the same it is futile to contend that the Resolution Plan floated by the Appellant
was not considered.
Contnd/.......
-2-
2. We find no merit in this appeal. It is accordingly dismissed. However
dismissal of this appeal would not preclude the Appellant from floating a Scheme
of Arrangement within the ambit of Section 230 of the Companies Act, 2013, if
found eligible.
[Justice Bansi Lal Bhat] Acting Chairperson
[Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra] Member (Technical) am/gc
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 586 of 2020
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