COMMON JUDGEMENT

Per Justice N. Seshasayee, Member (Judicial)

1.1 These appeals are preferred against the Order of the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT-I, Ahmedabad), dated 23.06.2025, in C.P.(IB) 69 of 2023, rejecting a resolution plan which the CoC had approved.

1.2 M/s Zep Infratech Ltd., the CD, underwent a CIRP process. It was partially successful in that the CoC had approved the resolution plan, but not the Adjudicating Authority. The CoC is aggrieved for whatever they along with the other creditors are entitled to receive is still at a distance. The Resolution Professional, someone who under the scheme of IBC is required to remain neutral and dispassionate, feels aggrieved since his conduct was adversely commented upon by the Adjudicating Authority. The SRA also feels aggrieved since the Adjudicating Authority had inter alia held that the plan was neither feasible nor viable since the SRA has not demonstrated its financial capacity. In short, the three principal players of a successful resolution process – the CoC, the RP and the SRA all were unhappy with the outcome and hence have preferred separate appeals challenging the Order of the Adjudicating Authority with the common object