Venugopal Dhoot vs Divyesh Desai
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 540 of 2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
A proposal for restructuring of the corporate debtor's debts, made by a person who is not the applicant whose application was admitted, cannot be treated as an application for withdrawal under Section 12A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Withdrawal of an admitted insolvency application under Section 12A requires an application made by the applicant, with the approval of ninety per cent voting share of the Committee of Creditors; absent such approval, the Adjudicating Authority cannot allow withdrawal and the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process cannot be closed on that basis.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Venugopal Dhoot ...Appellant
Versus
Divyesh Desai Resolution Professional of Trend Electronics Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant: None
For Respondents: Mr. Krishnendu Datta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Anand Varma, Mr. Kaustubh Prakash, Ms. Hita Sharma and Ms. Kirti Gupta, Ms. Apoorva Pandey, Advocates for R-1. Mr. Bishwajit Dubey, Mr. Madhav, Mr. Prafful Goyal, Advocates
With
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 541 of 2023
IN THE MATTER OF:
Venugopal Dhoot ...Appellant
Versus
Divyesh Desai Resolution Professional of Trend Electronics Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant: Mr. Amir Arsiwala, Aarohi Bhalla, Advocates.
For Respondents: Mr. Krishnendu Datta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 540 of 2023 & I.A. No.1758 of 2023 Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 541 of 2023
1 -2-
Anand Varma, Mr. Kaustubh Prakash, Ms. Hita Sharma and Ms. Kirti Gupta, Advocates for R-1.
ORDER
10.05.2023: These two appeals have been filed by the same Appellant
challenging the order dated 10.02.2023, by which the application filed by RP
u/s 33(2) for initiation of liquidation process has been allowed and the
application filed by the Appellant praying for closing the CIRP under 12A
has been rejected. The application which has been filed by the Appellant
u/s 12A is the application where the Appellant has made the following
prayers:-
i) "Direct the Respondents to produce the
minutes of the 30th meeting of the CoC of the
Corporate Debtor and to place the same on
record;
ii) Close the CIRP of the Corporate Debtor by
treating the same to have been withdrawn
under Section 12A of the IBC by acceptance of
the restructuring proposal submitted by the
Applicant;
iii) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the
present case, stay all further proceedings in the
CIRP of the Corporate Debtor;
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 540 of 2023 & I.A. No.1758 of 2023 Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 541 of 2023
2 -3-
iv) Any other order that this Hon'ble Tribunal may
deem fit in the facts and circumstances of this
case."
2. The Adjudicating Authority has observed that since 12A application
has not been filed by the IRP, the same cannot be entertained.
3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that Adjudicating
Authority has not considered the application on merit and on a technical
ground, rejected the application.
4. We have considered the submission of the Learned Counsel for the
Appellant and perused the record.
5. The application which was filed u/s 12A is an application where
Appellant has claimed that he has submitted a restructuring proposal which
should be accepted. Section 12A provides as follows:-
"12A. Withdrawal of application admitted
under section 7,9 or 10 - The Adjudicating
Authority may allow the withdrawal of application
admitted under section 7 or section 9 or section 10,
on an application made by the applicant with the
approval of ninety per cent voting share of the
committee of creditors, in such manner as may be
specified."
6. Present is the case where CoC has already been constituted and the
Resolution Plan were under consideration by the CoC. The application filed
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 540 of 2023 & I.A. No.1758 of 2023 Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 541 of 2023
3 -4-
by the Appellant cannot be treated to be an application for settlement u/s
12A.
7. Any proposal for re-structuring cannot be treated to be the proposal
u/s 12A, hence, we do not find any error in rejecting the application filed by
the Appellant. Moreover, there is no consent by 90% of CoC in favour of 12A
proposal of the Appellant.
8. We do not find any error in the order of the Adjudicating Authority,
the appeal is dismissed.
9. It is further to be noted that 12A proposal was actually given by Shri
Pradeep Nandlal Dhoot which was also considered and rejected by CoC in
30th CoC meeting.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) ss/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 540 of 2023 & I.A. No.1758 of 2023 Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 541 of 2023
4
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