Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Seroco Lighting Industries Pvt Ltd vs Ravi Kapoor Rp For Arya Filaments Pvt Ltd ...

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal10 December 2020

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

A successful resolution applicant in a corporate insolvency resolution process cannot be permitted to withdraw or seek revision of an approved resolution plan on the ground that it lacked knowledge of the corporate debtor's financial condition, where it was the sole resolution applicant, the corporate debtor is an MSME, and the applicant was aware, as a promoter or connected person, of the corporate debtor's financial health. Such a ground for seeking revision of an approved resolution plan does not constitute a material irregularity within the meaning of Section 61(3) 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, NEW DELHICompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1054 of 2020In the matter of:

Seroco Lighting Industries Pvt. Ltd. ....Appellant Vs. Ravi Kapoor, RP for Arya Filaments Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. ....Respondents

Present:

Appellant: Mr. Tirth Nayak, Mr. Abhijeet Swaroop, Advocates.

ORDER

(Through Virtual Mode) 10.12.2020: This appeal is directed against dismissal of I.A No. 96 of 2020

at the hands of the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal),

Indore Bench at Ahmedabad by impugned order dated 23rd October, 2020 by

virtue whereof the Appellant's prayer for revision of the approved Resolution Plan

has been turned down. After noticing that the Corporate Debtor is an MSME and

the Appellant being aware of the financial condition of the Corporate Debtor, it

submitted the sole Resolution Plan that came to be approved by the Adjudicating

Authority. The Adjudicating Authority observed that the contention of the

Appellant that it had no knowledge of the financial condition of the Corporate

Debtor cannot be entertained.

2. After hearing learned counsel for the Appellant and having regard to the

Judgments rendered by this Appellate Tribunal holding that the Successful

Contd/-..........

-2-

Resolution Applicant cannot be permitted to withdraw the approved Resolution

Plan coupled with the fact that the Appellant in the instant case being the sole

Resolution Applicant in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) of

the Corporate Debtor which has been classified as an MSME and admittedly

having knowledge of the financial health of the Corporate Debtor as a promoter

or a connected person cannot be permitted to seek revision of the approved

Resolution Plan on that ground which would not be a material irregularity within

the ambit of Section 61(3) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. We are

of the considered opinion that there is no merit in this appeal and the same is

liable to be dismissed.

3. We accordingly dismiss the appeal. However, taking into consideration the

fact that the Corporate Debtor is an MSME and there is economic slowdown

globally in the wake of outbreak of COVID-19 Pandemic, we deem it appropriate

to waive off the costs imposed by the Adjudicating Authority. The impugned order

to the extent of imposition of costs is accordingly set aside.

A copy of this order be communicated to the Adjudicating Authority.

[Justice Bansi Lal Bhat] Acting Chairperson

[Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra] Member (Technical)

[Shreesha Merla] Member (Technical)

AR/g Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1054 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