Saravana Global Holdings Ltd. & Anr vs Bafna Pharmaceuticals Ltd. & Anr
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 203 of 2019
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
In the insolvency resolution of a corporate debtor that is an MSME, where the promoter of the corporate debtor offers a viable and feasible resolution plan that maximises the value of the corporate debtor's assets and balances the interests of all stakeholders, the Committee of Creditors may defer the issuance of the Expression of Interest and the Information Memorandum and need not follow the full procedure for inviting prospective resolution applicants, since such procedure is not required where the promoter's plan is accepted, as in the case of a settlement under Section 12A. In exceptional circumstances, where the corporate debtor is an MSME, the promoter need not compete with other resolution applicants in order to regain control of the corporate debtor, provided the promoter's plan is viable, feasible, and satisfies the other criteria specified by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
(Arising out of Order dated 1st February, 2019 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Single Bench, Chennai in MA/71/2019 in CP/682/IB/CB/2017)
IN THE MATTER OF:
Saravana Global Holdings Ltd. & Anr. ...Appellants
Vs.
Bafna Pharmaceuticals Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellants: - Mr. Sudhir Makkar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Jatin Mongia, Mr. Yashvardhan Bandi, Ms. Riya, Mr. Abhishek Chaudhary, Ms. Sumya Gupta and Mr. N. Srikanth, Advocates.
For Respondents:- Mr. Basava Prabhu. S Patil, Senior Advocate with Mr. T.N. Purga Prasad, Mr. Soumik Ghosal, Mr. Geet Ahuja and Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocates for Respondent No. 2.
Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Senior Advocate with Mr. K.V. Balakrishnan and Mr. R.K. Sharma, Advocates for Respondent No.3.
Mr. P. V. Dinesh, Ms. Sindhu T.P and Mr. R.S. Lakashman, Advocates for SBI.
J U D G M E N T
SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, J.
Pursuant to an application filed by 'M/s. Aries' under Section 9 of
the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("I&B Code" for short), 2
'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process' was initiated against 'M/s.
Bafna Pharmaceuticals Limited'- ('Corporate Debtor'), a Micro, Small &
Medium Enterprises ('MSME', for short). The 3rd Respondent- Mr.
Mahaveer Chand Bafna, Promoter of the 'Corporate Debtor' filed
improved 'Resolution Plan' which was approved by the 'Committee of
Creditors' and placed before the Adjudicating Authority (National
Company Law Tribunal). By impugned order dated 1st February, 2019,
the Adjudicating Authority approved the improved plan of the promoter
of the 'Corporate Debtor' which is under challenge in this appeal.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellants submits
that 'Saravana Global Holdings Ltd.' along with Mrs. P. Shobha
(Appellants herein) were interested to submit their 'Resolution Plan' but
no opportunity was given to them to file the same.
3. According to the Appellants, the impugned order has been passed
approving the 'Resolution Plan' without complying the mandatory
provisions of the 'I&B Code'. It was submitted that as per Section 25 (2)
(h) of the 'I&B Code', it is the duty of the 'Resolution Professional' to invite
prospective 'Resolution Applicants' who fulfil criteria laid down by him
with the approval of the 'Committee of Creditors'. Once the 'Expression
of Interest' has been published under Regulation 36A and prospective
'Resolution Applicants' have been invited, the 'Information Memorandum'
prepared under Section 29 of the 'I&B Code' shall be shared with them.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insol.) No. 203 of 2019 3
4. It was submitted that the Respondents have failed to follow the
aforesaid procedure as prescribed under the 'I&B Code'.
5. It was further submitted that the 'Information Memorandum' was
prepared but it was not circulated. 2nd and 4th Respondents decided to
defer the publication of 'Expression of Interest' and inviting prospective
'Resolution Applicants' which they could not have done away with the
provisions entirely on account of the provisions being mandatory under
the 'I&B Code'.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of 2nd Respondent-
'Resolution Professional' submitted that the 'Committee of Creditors' in
its 3rd meeting held on 27th September, 2018, informed the members that
the Draft Invitation for 'Expression of Interest' and submission of
'Resolution Plan' with eligibility details to be published in newspapers
had been prepared and the same had already been circulated to all the
members of the 'Committee of Creditors'. The 'Committee of Creditors'
members have expressed that the publication of 'Expression of Interest'
may be deferred for the time being as there is an active consideration of
'Resolution Plan' with the 'Corporate Debtor' itself.
7. In the 4th 'Committee of Creditors' meeting which was held on 30th
November, 2018, the reasons for deferring the issue of 'Expression of
Interest' was discussed by the 'Committee of Creditors' members with
reasoning and the issue pertaining to extension application before the
Adjudicating Authority was discussed.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insol.) No. 203 of 2019 4
8. In the 5th 'Committee of Creditors' meeting held on 20th December,
2018, the 'Resolution Professional' was asked by the 'Committee of
Creditors' members regarding the eligibility of the 'Resolution Applicant'
(promoter of the 'Corporate Debtor'). The 'Resolution Professional'
confirmed the eligibility of the 'Resolution Applicant' being an MSME and
eligible under 29 A of the 'I&B Code'. The 'Resolution Applicant' (3rd
Respondent) presented his plan to the 'Committee of Creditors', which
was discussed in the meeting and unanimous decision was taken by the
'Committee of Creditors', relevant of which reproduced below:
".....(1) CD (Resolution Applicant) to submit the full set
of resolution plan again by 26th December, 2018
incorporating the further details required by the CoC
members points.
(2) The Resolution Plan to be presented to the CoC
again by the RP if the plan is in order incorporating
the changes proposed as per (1) above.
(3) In case details are not adequate or resolution plan
if presented is not approved, then the RP to seek for
'Expression of Interest."
9. It was submitted that all the requirements under the 'I&B Code'
have been complied with by the 'Interim Resolution Professional' and
'Resolution Professional', more specifically the 'Information
Memorandum' was prepared in compliance with section 25(2) (g) and
Company Appeal (AT) (Insol.) No. 203 of 2019 5
the same were furnished to the members of 'Committee of Creditors' on
obtaining the Non-Disclosure Agreement.
10. It is informed that the revised 'Resolution Plan' submitted by the
3rd Respondent was discussed and put to vote which was approved by
74.84 % votes in favour of the resolution plan. A monitoring committee
was constituted in order to successful implementation of the 'Resolution
Plan'.
11. It was also informed that 3rd Respondent in the initial stages also
tried for settlement under 12(A) of the 'I&B Code'. The 'Resolution
Applicant's' plan was under active consideration in at least three
'Committee of Creditors' meetings.
12. It was informed that the 'Resolution Plan' provides for payment to
'Operational Creditors' who had submitted their claim and which was
admitted by the 'Interim Resolution Professional'/'Resolution
Professional' and the statutory dues, employee's and workmen dues. The
financial creditors have been provided for to the tune of 70% of the
admitted claims. Thus the 'Resolution Plan' has taken care of all the
stakeholders and there is no discrimination of any kind whatsoever
amongst the same set of creditors.
13. Similar plea has been taken by the 'State Bank of India' on behalf
of lead Bank of the 'Committee of Creditors'. They have also taken plea
that in terms of Section 25(2) (h), the 'Resolution Professional' shall
invite prospective 'Resolution Applicants', who fulfil such criteria as
Company Appeal (AT) (Insol.) No. 203 of 2019 6
may be laid down by him with the approval of 'Committee of Creditors',
having regard to the complexity and scale of the operations of the
business of the 'Corporate Debtor'.
14. The 3rd Respondent has been in the pharmaceutical business for
close to 40 years, the 'Resolution Plan' having filed by 3 rd Respondent
being viable and feasible and fulfils all other financial matrix has been
accepted.
15. With regard to Appellant- 'Saravana Global Holdings Ltd.', it is
stated that Mr. Padam J Challani is also a Director, had a NPA account
with the answering Respondent, State Bank of India, for a debt
amounting to INR 48.33 Crores. This account was declared NPA on
29th March, 2012. Even restructuring attempts had failed as the
borrower could not repay any amount. Finally, the bank was
constrained to settle the account by taking a painful haircut of close
to 50% in March, 2018. The sacrifice made by the bank in this
settlement was INR 23.14 crores. It may be noted that the Appellants,
belonging to the same group companies, is making tall claims of
proposing a plan worth 100 Crores. However, before this Appellate
Tribunal, learned counsel for the Appellant submitted that the
Appellant is ready to pay total amount of Rs. 81.57 Crores.
16. The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the 'I&B Code'
specifically states the objective of the 'I&B Code' is to consolidate and
amend the laws relating to reorganization and insolvency resolution of
Company Appeal (AT) (Insol.) No. 203 of 2019 7
corporate persons, partnership firms and individuals in a time bound
manner for maximization of value of assets of such persons, to
promote entrepreneurship, availability of credit and balance the
interests of all the stakeholders including alteration in the priority of
payment of Government dues and to establish an Insolvency and
Bankruptcy Fund, and matters connected therewith or incidental
thereto. An effective legal framework for timely resolution of Insolvency
and Bankruptcy would support development of credit markets and
encourage entrepreneurship. It would also improve ease of doing
business, and facilitate more investments leading to higher economic
growth and development.
17. In "Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors.─
2019 SCC OnLine SC 73", the Hon'ble Supreme Court while deal with
preamble observed:
"20. As is discernible, the Preamble gives an
insight into what is sought to be achieved by the
Code. The Code is first and foremost, a Code for
reorganization and insolvency resolution of corporate
debtors. Unless such reorganization is effected in a
time-bound manner, the value of the assets of such
persons will deplete. Therefore, maximization of value
of the assets of such persons so that they are
efficiently run as going concerns is another very
important objective of the Code. This, in turn, will
Company Appeal (AT) (Insol.) No. 203 of 2019 8
promote entrepreneurship as the persons in
management of the corporate debtor are removed and
replaced by entrepreneurs. When, therefore, a
resolution plan takes off and the corporate debtor is
brought back into the economic mainstream, it is able
to repay its debts, which, in turn, enhances the
viability of credit in the hands of banks and financial
institutions. Above all, ultimately, the interests of all
stakeholders are looked after as the corporate debtor
itself becomes a beneficiary of the resolution scheme
- workers are paid, the creditors in the long run will
be repaid in full, and shareholders/investors are able
to maximize their investment. Timely resolution of a
corporate debtor who is in the red, by an effective
legal framework, would go a long way to support the
development of credit markets. Since more investment
can be made with funds that have come back into the
economy, business then eases up, which leads,
overall, to higher economic growth and development
of the Indian economy. What is interesting to note is
that the Preamble does not, in any manner, refer to
liquidation, which is only availed of as a last resort if
there is either no resolution plan or the resolution
plans submitted are not up to the mark. Even in
liquidation, the liquidator can sell the business of the
Company Appeal (AT) (Insol.) No. 203 of 2019 9
corporate debtor as a going concern. [See
ArcelorMittal (supra) at paragraph 83, footnote 3]."
18. Therefore, it is clear that 'I&B Code' envisages maximization of
value of the assets of the 'Corporate Debtor' so that they are efficiently
run as going concerns and in turn, will promote entrepreneurship. The
preamble does not, in any manner, refer to liquidation, which is only
availed of as a last resort if there is either no 'Resolution Plan' or the
'Resolution Plan's submitted are not up to the mark.
19. Admittedly, the 'Corporate Debtor' is a 'MSME' and the promoters
are not ineligible in terms of Section 29A of the 'I&B Code'. Therefore, it
is not necessary for the 'Committee of Creditors' to find out whether the
'Resolution Applicant' is ineligible in terms of Section 29A or not.
20. The 'Committee of Creditors' is to consider the feasibility, viability
and such other requirements as has been specified by the Board. If it
proposes maximisation of the assets and is found to be feasible, viable
and fulfil all other requirements as specified by the Board, the company
being MSME, it is not necessary for the 'Committee of Creditors' to follow
all the procedures under the 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process'.
For example, if case is settled before the constitution of the 'Committee
of Creditors' or in terms of Section 12A on the basis of offer given by
Promoter, in such case, all other procedure for calling of application of
'Resolution Applicant' etc. are not followed. If the Promoter satisfy all the
creditors and is in a position to keep the 'Corporate Debtor' as a going
Company Appeal (AT) (Insol.) No. 203 of 2019 10
concern, it is always open to 'Committee of Creditors' to accept the terms
of settlement and approve it by 90% of the voting shares. The same
principle can be followed in the case of MSME.
21. The Parliament with specific intention amended the provisions of
the 'I&B Code' by allowing the Promoters of 'MSME' to file 'Resolution
Plan'. The intention of the legislature shows that the Promoters of 'MSME'
should be encouraged to pay back the amount with the satisfaction of the
'Committee of Creditors' to regain the control of the 'Corporate Debtor'
and entrepreneurship by filing 'Resolution Plan' which is viable, feasible
and fulfils other criteria as laid down by the 'Insolvency and Bankruptcy
Board of India'.
22. Therefore, we hold that in exceptional circumstances, if the
'Corporate Debtor' is MSME, it is not necessary for the Promoters to
compete with other 'Resolution Applicants' to regain the control of the
'Corporate Debtor'.
23. In the present case, the Adjudicating Authority on perusal of the
'Resolution Plan' observed as follows:
"7. The perusal of the 'Resolution Plan'
shows that it provides for the Resolution for all the
Financial Creditors, out of the total claim of
Rs.49.23 Crores, the payment proposed is
Rs.34.46 Crores. It further provides that 70% of
the admitted claims of all the Financial Creditors
Company Appeal (AT) (Insol.) No. 203 of 2019 11
shall be paid within three months from the
'Approval Date' as full and final settlement of the
dues and personal guarantees. In relation to the
Workmen dues, it provides for total payment of
Rs. 0.24 Crores, as far as the Employees' dues
are concerned, the Plan provides for total
payment of Rs.0.32 Crores. The Plan also
provides for payment of Insolvency Resolution
Process Costs, the dues for PP and ESI. A
provision has also been made for payments of
Rs.6.53 Crores to other Operational Creditors
and Rs.0.13 Crores towards statutory liabilities.
In essence, the Plan provides to settle the claim
of various stakeholders.
8. The Plan provides that to balance the
interest of all stakeholders, a capital reduction
is proposed and the capital of all the fully paid
up equity shareholders as on 30.06.2018 shall
be reduced to 10% and consequently, the
existing 2.36 Crores number of shares shall be
reduced to 0.236 number of shares.
9. The Resolution Plan provides that upon its
approval the Resolution Applicant shall have
authority to reconstitute the Board of Director
Company Appeal (AT) (Insol.) No. 203 of 2019 12
and the Board shall have the authority to act
and execute in the name and on behalf of the
Corporate Debtor all deeds, receipts, and other
documents, as may be required. However, the
Resolution Applicant shall be responsible for
the proper implementation of the proposed
Resolution Plan from the date of its approval.
Further, the Resolution Plan provides that the
Resolution Applicant will appoint a Chartered
Accountant or a Resolution Prof essional
qualified and registered under the IBBI as the
supervisor ("supervisor") for the supervision of
the approved Resolution Plan, a representative
from Corporate Debtor and other two
representatives from the Financial Creditors. The
supervisor shall be appointed for a period till the
payment of all the liabilities mentioned in the
Resolution Plan. Therefore, the Resolution Plan
provides suitable arrangement for management
of the Corporate Debtor and the implementation
of the same (Plan).
10. Thus, the 'Resolution Plan' filed with the
Application meets the requirements of Section
30(2) of the I&B Code, 2016 and Regulations
Company Appeal (AT) (Insol.) No. 203 of 2019 13
37, 38, 38(1A) and 39 (4) of IBBI (CIRP)
Regulations, 2016. The 'Resolution Plan' is also not
in contravention of any of the provisions of Section
29A. The Resolution Professional has also certified
that the "Resolution Plan" approved by the CoCs
does not contravene any of the provisions of the
law for the time being in force. The Compliance
Certificate is placed at pages 7 to 11 of the typed
set filed with the Application. The 'Resolution Plan'
stands approved by the CoCs with 74.84% voting
share."
24. In view of the fact that the 'Resolution Applicant' is the Promoter of
the 'M/s. Bafna Pharmaceuticals Limited'- ('Corporate Debtor'), 'MSME',
we hold that it is open to the 'Committee of Creditors' to defer the process
of issuance of 'Information Memorandum', if the Promoter of MSME offers
a viable and feasible plan maximising the assets of the 'Corporate Debtor'
and balancing all the stakeholders. For such purpose, it is not required
to follow all the procedure as the case for accepting the proposal under
Section 12A of the 'I&B Code'.
25. This apart, one of the Director of the Appellant having declared
'NPA' by the 'State Bank of India', lead Bank of the 'Committee of
Creditors', at this stage, we are not inclined to give opportunity to the
Appellant to file its offer.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insol.) No. 203 of 2019 14
26. We find no merit in this appeal. It is accordingly, dismissed. No
costs.
(Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya) Chairperson
(Justice A.I.S. Cheema) Member(Judicial)
NEW DELHI 4th July, 2019
AR
Company Appeal (AT) (Insol.) No. 203 of 2019
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