SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(SC) 141

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.M. KHANWILKAR, B.R. GAVAI, KRISHNA MURARI, JJ.
KALPRAJ DHARAMSHI & ANR. - APPELLANTS
VERSUS
KOTAK INVESTMENT ADVISORS LTD. & ANR. - RESPONDENTS
CIVIL APPEAL NOS.3138-3139 OF 2020 CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2949-2950 OF 2020 CIVIL APPEAL NO.847-848 of 2021 [D.NO.24125 OF 2020], CIVIL APPEAL NOS.2943-2944 OF 2020
Decided on : 10-03-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the parties :Ruby Singh Ahuja, Kalpana Unadkat, Prateek Kumar, Tahira Karanjawala, Anupm Prakash, Raveena Rai, Utkarsh Maria, Anmol Jassal, for M/s KARANJAWALA & CO., Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Suresh D Dobhal, Nirmal Goenka, Shikhar Kumar, Gaurav Agrawal, K. V. Vishwanathan, Dheeraj Nair, Varghese Thomas, Vishrutyi Sahni, Shyam Divan, Pooja Mahajan, Avinash Amarnath, Mahima Singh, Avni Shrivastav, Ritesh Kumar, David Rao, M. S. Vishnu Sankar, Sriram Parakkat, Athira G. Nair, Atul Sharma for M/S LAWFIC Gaurav Agrawal, Advocates

Headnote:

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 10 and 14 - Application - Resolution Plan - Grant of approval - Corporate Debtor filed an application on before NCLT under Section 10 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (hereinafter referred to as “CIRP”) of itself vide Company Petition (IB) No. 156/MB/2018 - NCLT vide order dated admitted Petition and directed moratorium to commence as prescribed under Section 14 of I&B Code and directed certain statutory steps to be taken as a consequence thereof - Vide said order dated, NCLT also appointed Mr. Krishna Chamadia as Interim Resolution Professional to carry out functions as prescribed - Whether the appeals filed by KIAL before NCLAT were within limitation? - Whether there was waiver and acquiescence by KIAL, so as to estop it from challenging the participation of Kalpraj? – Held, It is also pointed out, that in pursuance of order dated passed by NCLAT, CoC has approved resolution plan of KIAL - However, since we have already held, that decision of NCLAT dated does not stand the scrutiny of law, it must follow, that subsequent approval of resolution plan of KIAL by CoC becomes nonest in law - For, it was only to abide by the directions of NCLAT – Court are of view that nothing would turn on it - Decision of CoC dated is a decision, which has been taken in exercise of its ‘commercial wisdom’ - As such, Court hold, that decision taken by CoC dat which is taken in accordance with its ‘commercial wisdom’ and which is duly approved by NCLT, will prevail - Further, NCLAT was not justified in interfering with the stated decision taken by CoC - All appeals are disposed of in view of above and pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.

JUDGMENT :

B.R. GAVAI, J.

1. Leave to file Civil Appeal in Diary No. 24125 of 2020 is granted.

2. All these appeals, assail the judgment and order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “NCLAT”) dated 5.8.2020, passed in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) Nos. 344-345 of 2020.

3. By the said judgment and order dated 5.8.2020, NCLAT has allowed the appeals filed by Kotak Investment Advisors Limited (hereinafter referred to as “KIAL”), respondent No.1 herein, aggrieved by two separate orders dated 28.11.2019 passed by National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench (hereinafter referred to as “NCLT” or “Adjudicating Authority”) in M.A. No.1039 of 2019 and M.A. No. 691 of 2019. NCLAT has set aside the said orders passed in the said M.As. M.A. No.1039 of 2019 was filed by KIAL objecting to grant of approval to the resolution plan submitted by Kalpraj Dharamshi and Rekha Jhunjhunwala, a consortium, (hereinafter referred to as “Kalpraj”), which is appellant in Civil Appeal Nos. 2943-2944 of 2020. NCLT has rejected the said M.A. Whereas, M.A. No. 691 of 2019 was filed by the Resolution Professional of Ricoh India Limited (hereinafter referred to as “the Corporate Debtor”) for grant of approval to the Resolution Plan submitted by Kalpraj. NCLT has allowed the said M.A. and approved the resolution plan submitted by Kalpraj.

4. The facts in brief, giving rise to the present appeals are as under:

The Corporate Debtor filed an application on 29.1.2018 before NCLT under Section 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as “I&B Code”) for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (hereinafter referred to as “CIRP”) of itself vide Company Petition (IB) No. 156/MB/2018. NCLT vide order dated 14.5.2018, admitted the Petition and directed the moratorium to commence as prescribed under Section 14 of the I&B Code and directed certain statutory steps to be taken as a consequence thereof. Vide the said order dated 14.5.2018, NCLT also appointed Mr. Krishna Chamadia as Interim Resolution Professional to carry out the functions as prescribed under the provisions of the I&B Code. The said Mr. Krishna Chamadia was subsequently confirmed as Resolution Professional (hereinafter referred to as ‘RP’) by the Committee of Creditors (hereinafter referred to as “CoC”) on 15.6.2018.

RP vide notification dated 9.7.2018 invited expression of interest (hereinafter referred to as “EOI”) to submit a resolution plan from interested resolution applicants, who fulfilled the minimum conditions stipulated in the said document (EOI). As per the said EOI, if any proposed applicant had any queries or clarifications, it was required to write to RP on or before 31.7.2018. The EOI was required to be submitted via email on the email address of RP or via post at the address mentioned in the said invitation on or before 8.8.2018.

On the said date i.e. 9.7.2018, analogously, the first Form ‘G’ also came to be notified. Vide the said Form ‘G’, the last date prescribed for submission of Resolution Plan was on or before 21.9.2018. The second Form ‘G’ came to be issued on 24.8.2018, which required the Resolution Plans to be submitted on or before 28.9.2018. The third Form ‘G’ came to be issued on 28.9.2018, which required the Resolution Plans to be submitted on or before 25.10.2018. The fourth Form ‘G’ came to be issued on 9.11.2018, which required the Resolution Plans to be submitted on or before 13.12.2018. The fifth and the last Form ‘G’ came to be issued on 11.12.2018, which required the Resolution Plans to be submitted on or before 8.1.2019.

KIAL, the appellant before NCLAT (respondent No.1 herein) and one Karvy Data Management Systems Limited submitted their Resolution Plans on the last date as stipulated in the last and fifth Form ‘G’ i.e. on 8.1.2019.

One another applicant i.e. WeP Solutions Ltd. subm

                            Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                            1
                            2
                            3
                            4
                            5
                            6
                            7
                            8
                            9
                            10
                            11
                            SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                            supreme today icon
                            logo-black

                            An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                            Please visit our Training & Support
                            Center or Contact Us for assistance

                            qr

                            Scan Me!

                            India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                            For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                            whatsapp-icon Back to top