Sanjay Jain And Ors vs Nilesh Sharma And Anr
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1390 of 2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a resolution plan has been approved by the Committee of Creditors with the requisite majority, and the objecting creditor belongs to the same class as those who assented to it, that creditor cannot maintain a challenge to the plan and has no locus to object to its approval; the objection must be rejected outright, though the tribunal may examine the grounds to see whether any aspect falls within the scope of Section 30(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1390 of 2023 & I.A. No. 4970 of 2023
IN THE MATTER OF:
Sanjay Jain & Ors. ...Appellant
Versus
Nilesh Sharma ...Respondents Resolution Professional of M/S Dream Procon Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
Present: For Appellant: Mr. P Nagesh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Harshal Kumar, Mr. Apoorv Rastogi, Advocates For Respondent:
ORDER
01.11.2023: Heard Mr. P Nagesh, Sr. Advocate for the Appellant.
2. This Appeal has been filed against the Order dated 23rd August, 2023
by which order I.A. filed by the Appellant being I.A. No. 3865 of 2021 raising
objection to the Resolution Plan approved by the CoC has been rejected.
3. The CoC which is a committee of creditors in a class has submitted the
resolution plan which was approved with 90.66 % votes. The Appellant who
belongs to the same class of creditors is aggrieved by the approval of the plan
by the CoC. The Adjudicating Authority relying on Judgment of Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Jaypee Kensington Boulevard Apartments Welfare
Association and Ors. Vs. NBCC (India) Ltd. and Ors. paragraph 218-219 has
dismissed the Application on the ground that Appellant has no locus to
challenge the approval of the plan.
-2-
4. We are in full agreement with the view taken by the Adjudicating
Authority relying on Jaypee Kensington which is clear from para 218-219
where following has been held:
"218. To sum up this part of discussion, in our view, after approval of the resolution plan of NBCC by CoC, where homebuyers as a class assented to the plan, any individual homebuyer or association cannot maintain any challenge to the resolution plan nor could be treated as carrying any legal grievance.
219. Once we have held that these dissatisfied homebuyers and associations are not entitled to put up any challenge to the resolution plan contrary to the decision of the requisite majority of their class, all their objections are required to be rejected outright. Yet, in the interest of justice, we have examined these objections to find if there be any aspect worth consideration within the periphery of Section 30(2) of the Code. We find none."
5. Following the said judgment, we find that no error has been committed by the Adjudicating Authority rejecting application. There is no merit in the Appeal, the Appeal is dismissed.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Mr. Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Mr. Arun Baroka] Member (Technical)
Basant/nn Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1390/2023
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