JUDGMENT :

Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, J.

Pursuant to applications under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as “I&B Code”) filed by the ‘Standard Chartered Bank’ and the ‘State Bank of India’, the ‘Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process’ was initiated against ‘Essar Steel India Limited’- (‘Corporate Debtor’).

2. In response to the advertisement, the Appellants- ‘Numetal Limited’ and ‘Arcellor Mittal India Ltd.’- (‘Resolution Applicants’) (‘AM India Ltd.’ for short) along with another, submitted their Resolution Plan(s). The ‘Resolution Professional’ held both the Appellants- ‘Numetal Ltd.’ and ‘AM India Ltd.’- (‘Resolution Applicants’) ineligible in view of Section 29A of the ‘I&B Code’ which resulted in applications preferred by the Appellants before the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Ahmedabad Bench, under Section 60(5) of the ‘I&B Code’.

3. The Adjudicating Authority by impugned order dated 19th April, 2018, while held that both the Appellants ineligible under Section 29A of the ‘I&B Code’, taking into consideration that the ‘Committee of Creditors’ has not followed the procedures under Section 30(4), partly allowed the applications directing the ‘Resolution Professional’ and the ‘Committee of Creditors’ to revisit and reconsider their decision in the light of proviso to Section 29A (c) read with proviso to Section 30(4) of the ‘I&B Code’ and to act in accordance with law and/or to make good of the disability. The parties were granted liberty to challenge the reconsidered decision of the ‘Committee of Creditors’ in accordance with law before appropriate forum.

4. Both the parties have challenged the impugned order dated 19th April, 2018, so far it relates to their respective findings and with regard to the findings of the contesting ‘Resolution Applicant(s)’.

Background of the case

5. The ‘Resolution Professional’ issued advertisement on 6th October, 2017 under Section 25(2)(h) of the ‘I&B Code’ invitation seeking ‘Expression of Interest’ to submit ‘Resolution Plan’ for ‘Essar Steel India Ltd.’ from potential ‘Resolution Applicants’ which were to be submitted along with relevant document on or before 5 P.M. on 23rd October, 2017.

6. ‘AM India Ltd.’ submitted its ‘Expression of Interest’ to submit ‘Resolution Plan’ along with all relevant documents on 11th October, 2017.

7. The ‘Numetal Ltd.’ submitted ‘Expression of Interest’ of ‘Resolution Plan’ along with all relevant documents on 20th October, 2017, which was accepted and confirmed by the ‘Resolution Professional’ on 31st October, 2017.

8. After submission of the ‘Expression of Interest’ of ‘Resolution Plan(s)’, Section 29A was inserted by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Ordinance, 2017, followed by the ‘Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act, 2017’ w.e.f. 23rd November, 2017.

9. In view of insertion of Section 29A, the ‘Resolution Professional’ by an addendum dated 8th February, 2018, asked the ‘Resolution Applicants’ to submit the ‘Resolution Plans’. The ‘AM India Ltd.’ thereafter, submitted ‘Resolution Plan’ on 12th February, 2018. ‘Numetal’ also submitted its ‘Resolution Plan’ on the same date i.e. 12th February, 2018.

10. On receipt of ‘Resolution Plan’s’, the ‘Resolution Professional’ explained the eligibility of both the Appellants, after advice of ‘Resolution Professionals’, Legal Counsel, Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas (CAM), Mr. Darius Khambata, Former Advocate General, Maharashtra and Former Additional Solicitor General, for his opinion as follows:

“Numetal Limited

As on the Plan Submission Date:

(a) Ravi Ruia (who is the father of Rewant Ruia (who is one of the ultimate beneficiaries and owners of a shareholder of Numetal through various holding companies and trusts and given that Numetal is relying on the credentials of its shareholders for the purposes of the resolution plan) i