The approval of a Resolution Plan by the Committee of Creditors is final unless proven otherwise, emphasizing limited grounds for appellate interference.

O R D E R

(Hybrid Mode)

21.02.2025:

These appeals have been filed challenging the same order passed by the Adjudicating Authority dated 20.09.2024 by which the Adjudicating Authority has approved the Resolution Plan of the Corporate Cont’d…/ Promoter i.e. Jai Prakash Keswani, also challenges order passed by the Adjudicating Authority in IA No.5451 of 2023 by which objections were raised by the Appellant to the Resolution Plan. Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 94 of 2025 has been filed by a Homebuyer against the approval of Resolution Plan.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the Promoter submits that the Resolution Plan is not implementable and there is no viability and feasibility of the plan. It is submitted that the time for implementation of the plan i.e. handing over of units within 9 months is not possible and further it is subject to receipt of Occupancy Certificate, hence, the plan is conditional and contingent and ought not to have been approved.

3. Learned counsel for the Homebuyer has raised similar issues and submits that plan is conditional and contingent. He has referred to Regulation 38 of the CIRP Regulations, 2016 and submits that the plan does not contain necessary ingredients which are required under Regulation 38, which is indicated from contents of the plan.

4. Learned counsel for the Promoter also made submission that while rejecting IA filed by the Appellant raising objections, it was observed that the objections of the Appellant shall be considered while considering the Resolution Plan approval application whereas in the order which has been passed approving the Resolution Plan there is no consideration.

5. We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. Coming to appeal filed by the Promoter, we may first notice the objections of the Appellant that while deciding the IA 5451, in Para 15 it was observed by the Adjudicating Authority that objections which has been raised by the Promoter shall be considered at the time of approval of the Resolution Plan. In Para 15 of the order following has been observed:

“15. However, several grounds which have been taken by the applicant in the present application pertain to the compliances that a Resolution Plan must follow through in order to be approved by this AA. Consequently, it would be imprudent for this AA to delve into the said contentions in light of the fact that the IA for approval of the aforesaid resolution plan is already pending before this AA and the same will be carefully considered in consonance with the provisions of the IBC, 2016 and the corresponding provisions of the allied rules and regulations.”

7. Now when we look into the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority approving the Resolution Plan i.e. order dated 20.09.2024 in Para 45 the Adjudicating Authority made following observations:

“45. Additionally, it is pertinent to mention that certain contentions pertaining to the present resolution plan were raised in the aforementioned I.A.s. However, with regards to the aforesaid objections which have been raised by the virtue of the said L.A.s, this AA is satisfied that the said objections have been properly addressed in this resolution plan.”

8. The objections which was raised in the IA thus was held to be properly addressed in the Resolution Plan. The principle argument of the Promoter is that the plan is not implementable within 9 months and neither it is viable and feasible. Plan is not implementable within 9 months is not an issue which can be decided at the time of approval of the plan. The question that the plan cannot be implemented within 9 months is the question which can be raised after expiry of the period as contemplated in the plan.

9. In so far as viability and feasibility, it is the commercial wisdom of the CoC to take a decision on viability and feasibility of the plan. The CoC having approved the plan with 100% voting, the CoC deemed to have adverted to the viability and feasibility of the