Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Ramesh Kumar Suneja vs Pawan Buildwell Pvt Ltd & Ors

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal20 October 2020

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors, including a decision to liquidate the corporate debtor, is not justiciable and cannot be interfered with in the absence of any material irregularity in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process; a challenge that the sole creditor's decision was vindictive or mala fide does not displace that principle.

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

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHICompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 915 of 2020

IN THE MATTER OF: Ramesh Kumar Suneja ....Appellant

Vs

Pawan Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. ....Respondents

Present: For Appellant: Mr. Piyush Singh, Mr. Aditya Parolia and Mr. Akshay Srivastava, Advocates. For Respondents: ORDER

(Through Virtual Mode)

20.10.2020: This appeal is directed against order of liquidation in respect of

the Corporate Debtor passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company

Law Tribunal), New Delhi Bench (Court II). The issue raised is that the sole

creditor constitutes the Committee of Creditors and the decision taken to

liquidate the Corporate Debtor is vindictive and malafide.

2. It is trite law that the commercial wisdom of Committee of Creditors with

regard to a business decision in approval of Resolution Plan or sending the

Corporate Debtor into liquidation cannot be called in question and the same is

not justiciable. It is not permissible to sit over the decision of Committee of

Creditors when it decides to liquidate the Corporate Debtor, that too with 100%

voting share. Commercial wisdom is the domain of Committee of Creditors and

same is beyond the pale of challenge in so far as taking a business decision is

concerned. In absence of any material irregularity in Corporate Insolvency

Resolution Process, such decision cannot be interfered with. -2-

3. Shri Piyush Singh, learned counsel representing the Appellant submits

that Corporate Debtor is prepared to settle the claims of the Creditors. If that be

the case, the Corporate Debtor can take resort to provisions of Section 230 of the

Companies Act, 2013 even at the liquidation stage by floating Settlement Plan/

Scheme/ Compromise.

4. Keeping in view the submission made by learned counsel for the Appellant

and the fact that the Corporate Debtor intends to settle with the Creditors, we

dismiss the instant appeal with observation that the dismissal this appeal shall

not preclude the Corporate Debtor from advancing proposal or floating a

scheme/ settlement in terms of aforesaid provision. The appeal is accordingly

dismissed.

[Justice Bansi Lal Bhat] Acting Chairperson

[Justice Jarat Kumar Jain] Member (Judicial)

[Dr. Alok Srivastava] Member (Technical)

am/gc

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 910 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