Sanjeev Azad vs Mr. Desh Deepak Rp Of Ria Construction ...
- CitationComp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1089 of 2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
A resolution applicant whose eligibility to submit a resolution plan has been adjudicated against him by a final order of the Adjudicating Authority, and not challenged, cannot have the Committee of Creditors' rejection of his plan on ineligibility grounds reviewed on the basis of a later-accruing ineligibility where no fresh determination has been sought and the liquidation order has not yet been passed. A Committee of Creditors' decision that a plan is not to be considered because the applicant is ineligible, where that ineligibility has been finally affirmed by the Adjudicating Authority and not set aside on appeal, is not shown to be erroneous merely by the applicant's contention that he has since become ineligible; the appellate forum will not interfere with the Adjudicating Authority's reasoned rejection of an application seeking to set aside that CoC decision. An objection to the appointment of a liquidator, not yet made, may be raised before the Adjudicating Authority, and is not a ground on which the appellate forum will adjudicate the matter at the appellate stage.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Sanjeev Azad ....Appellant Vs. Desh Deepak ...Respondents Resolution Professional in Matter of Ria Construction Ltd. & Ors. For Appellant: Mr. Pulkit Deora, Mr. Harsh Gurbani, Advocates. For Respondents:
ORDER
18.09.2023: I.A. No. 3762 of 2023:- There is a delay of 8 days in filing the Appeal. Cause shown sufficient to condone the delay. IA No.3762 of 2023 is disposed of.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1089 of 2023
2. This Appeal has been filed against the order dated 29.05.2023 passed by the Adjudicating Authority deciding IA No.1371 of 2022 filed by the Appellant as well as certain other IAs. Appellant who claim to be the promoter of the Corporate Debtor has submitted a Resolution Plan which plan was not approved by the CoC as Appellant held to be ineligible. Appellant has already filed an IA No.877 of 2019 to declare the Appellant's eligibility which was rejected on 22.01.2020. The said order has not been challenged have become final. The Application IA No.1371 of 2022 was filed by the Appellant praying for setting aside the decision of the CoC dated 03.09.2019. The CoC in its meeting dated 03.09.2019 has approved the proposal for liquidation of the Corporate Debtor.
2 3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Application for liquidation is still pending and no final order has been passed directing for liquidation. It is submitted that the Appellant has become ineligible after 22.01.2020, hence, his non-consideration of the plan on the ground of ineligibility is erroneous.
4. We have considered the submissions of the Appellant and perused the record.
5. Appellant's Application to declare the Appellant's eligibility having been already rejected on 22.01.2020, we see no error in the decision of the CoC in 10th meeting held on 03.09.2019 that Appellant is not eligible since his plan is disapproved for 94% of CoC. Adjudicating Authority has given adequate reasons for rejecting IA No.1371 of 2022 filed by the Appellant.
6. Learned Counsel for the Appellant lastly contended that the Resolution Professional be not appointed by the Liquidator.
7. Appointment of Liquidator has not yet taken place. It is always open for the Appellant to make his objection before the Adjudicating Authority. The Appeal is dismissed, accordingly.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
Anjali/nn
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