Case Law
Subject : Corporate Law - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC)
Description :
Kolkata, WB
– The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Kolkata Bench, comprising Smt.
Bidisha Banerjee (Member Judicial
) and Cmde Siddharth Mishra (Member Technical), has approved the resolution plan for
The order, dated April 8, 2025, underscores key principles of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, including the "clean slate" doctrine for the corporate debtor under new management and the continuing liability of the old management for offences committed prior to the insolvency process.
The RP, Mr.
The resolution plan submitted by Mr.
Unsecured Financial Creditors: Admitted claims of ₹158.08 lakhs to be paid in full.
Operational Creditors (Other than related parties): Against admitted claims of ₹1493.44 lakhs, an amount of ₹9.08 lakhs is provided.
CIRP Costs: Admitted and provided for at ₹10.00 lakhs.
The CoC, in its commercial wisdom, approved this plan with a 100% voting share on August 17, 2024, well within the 180-day CIRP period.
The NCLT, after hearing counsels and perusing the documents, found the resolution plan compliant with Sections 30 and 31 of the IBC and Regulations 38 and 39 of the IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016.
The Tribunal clarified its powers regarding reliefs and concessions sought in the plan. Citing Embassy Property Developments Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Karnataka , it stated that NCLT can grant reliefs falling under the IBC and Companies Act, 2013. For matters concerning other governmental authorities, the SRA must approach the respective competent bodies, who are encouraged to consider such requests in the spirit of the IBC.
Relying on the Supreme Court's landmark judgment in Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons Private Limited vs. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited , the NCLT affirmed that: > "once a resolution plan is duly approved by the Adjudicating Authority... the claims as provided in the resolution plan shall stand frozen and will be binding on the Corporate Debtor and its employees, members, creditors, including the Central Govt., any State Govt. or any local authority, guarantors and other stakeholders.”
This means any claims not part of the approved resolution plan stand extinguished, allowing the SRA to start on a "fresh slate."
The Tribunal, citing Lalit Kumar Jain v. Union of India , reiterated that the approval of a resolution plan does not automatically discharge the personal guarantors of the corporate debtor from their liabilities. The financial creditors were directed to invoke personal guarantees if not already done.
A significant aspect of the order dealt with criminal liabilities. The NCLT extensively quoted the Supreme Court in
* The corporate debtor , under new management post-resolution, is extinguished of criminal liability for offences committed prior to CIRP. * However, "every person who was...in charge of, or responsible to the corporate debtor for the conduct of its business" during the commission of such offences remains liable and can be prosecuted.
The judgment emphasized: > "Only the corporate debtor (with new management)...will be safeguarded...The prosecution in relation to 'every person who was...in charge of...or responsible to the corporate debtor...shall be proceeded and the law will take it’s own course."
And further: > "There is no escape for those persons from criminal liability even though the corporate debtor is given a clean slate and is handed over to the new Management.”
The NCLT acknowledged its limited jurisdiction in interfering with the commercial aspects of a resolution plan approved by the CoC. It referred to Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Limited vs. Satish Kumar Gupta and Jaypee Kensington Boulevard Apartments Welfare Association and Ors. vs. NBCC (India) Ltd. and Ors. , highlighting that the commercial wisdom of the CoC in approving a plan is paramount.
The NCLT
approved
the resolution plan of Mr.
1. The SRA must comply with statutory obligations and seek necessary approvals within one year.
2. The moratorium imposed under Section 14 of the IBC ceases from the date of the order.
3. The Resolution Professional, Mr.
4. Financial creditors are directed to invoke personal guarantees.
The NCLT's approval of the resolution plan marks a critical step towards the revival of
#NCLT #IBC2016 #ResolutionPlan #NationalCompanyLawTribunal
Supreme Court Rules Criminal Courts Must Not Act As Recovery Agents For Disputed Dues
27 Jul 2026
Rajya Sabha Bill Seeks To Criminalize Vande Mataram Disruption Under The National Honour Act
27 Jul 2026
Will Competitive Exams Deplete Delhi District Courts of Judges During Crucial Trial Proceedings This Year?
27 Jul 2026
Bombay High Court Adjourns Defamation Case Involving Union Minister Nitin Gadkari And Online Media Platforms
28 Jul 2026
Rajasthan High Court Directs State to Form Separate Wings for Crime Investigation and Security
28 Jul 2026
Gujarat High Court Upholds Constitutionality Of CGST Section 16 2 c Denying Unpaid Input Tax
28 Jul 2026
Punjab and Haryana High Court Issues New Guidelines For Legal Aid Defense Counsel System
28 Jul 2026
Government Introduces Public Examinations Amendment Bill 2026 In Lok Sabha To Curb Exam Paper Leaks
28 Jul 2026
Should Delhi High Court Increase Pecuniary Jurisdiction of District Courts to ₹10 Crore Threshold?
28 Jul 2026
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.