Satish Chander Verma & Anr vs Arena Superstructures Pvt Ltd
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 404 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a resolution plan has already been approved by the Adjudicating Authority under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, the Adjudicating Authority cannot thereafter entertain a claim of a stakeholder qua the corporate debtor's assets on the ground of the claimant's unawareness of the CIRP; such an application stands rejected as there is no occasion for considering any claim once the plan has been approved.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Satish Chander Verma & Anr. ...Appellant(s)
Versus
Arena Superstructures Pvt Ltd. through Successful ...Respondent(s) Resoution Applicant
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Rishi Sood, Mr. Prafull Singh Chandel, Advocates For Respondents : Mr. Prithu Garg, Mr. Parth Bhatia, Mr. Shivam Singh, Advocates
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
05.03.2024: Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant.
2. This Appeal has been filed against the Order dated 19.12.2023 passed
by the Adjudicating Authority in I.A. No. 5308 of 2023 which was filed by the
Appellant to consider the claim of the Appellant qua Apartment No. 102, First
Floor, Tower No. 7. The Adjudicating Authority rejected the Application on the
ground that the resolution plan has already been approved by the
Adjudicating Authority and the Resolution Professional ceased to function.
3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that Appellant was not
aware of the CIRP and he could not file the claim. 2
4. Resolution Plan having been approved by the Adjudicating Authority,
there is no occasion for considering any claim and we do not find any error in
the order of the Adjudicating Authority rejecting application.
The Appeal is dismissed.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) Basant/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.404/2024
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