AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
26.03.2025: Heard Shri Shaunak Mitra, learned counsel for the Appellants and Shri Joy Saha, learned counsel appearing for the Resolution Professional. This appeal has been filed against order passed by the Adjudicating Authority dated 18.10.2024 approving the Resolution Plan of the Corporate Debtor – Duncans Industries Ltd.
The Appellants before us are Financial/Operational Creditors who claim that they have provided their finance/services to the Corporate Debtor during CIRP. It is submitted that an application was filed by the Appellants before the Adjudicating Authority in July, 2024 which application is still pending and the Adjudicating Authority has approved the Resolution Plan on 18.10.2024 without deciding the application.
Learned counsel for the Resolution Professional submits that the plan was approved by the CoC on 01.03.2022 and the application for plan approval was heard and reserved on 21.01.2024 and applications by the Appellants have been filed thereafter. Learned counsel for the Resolution Professional submits that there is no merit in the applications since no claims were filed in time.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
In so far as challenge to plan approval order dated 18.10.2024 is concerned, we see no reason to entertain appeal at the instance of the Appellants who were not stakeholders in the CIRP. Learned counsel for the Resolution Professional submits that the plan itself refers to CIRP cost and provides for an amount of Rs.11.50 Crores and refers to Clause 1.1 and 2.1.2 of Para 2.1 Part B of the Resolution Plan. Learned counsel for the Resolution Professional submits that the clauses clearly provide for the payment of actuals.
As submitted by learned counsel for the Appellants, the applications being still pending before the Adjudicating Authority, we are not required to express any opinion on the merits of the applications in this appeal. We, however, are of the view that at the instance of the Appellants no grounds have been made out to entertain challenge to the Resolution Plan of the Corporate Debtor. We, thus, are of the view that the challenge to the approval of Resolution Plan at the instance of Appellants’ deserve to be dismissed.
We, however, observe that this order shall not preclude the Adjudicating Authority to consider and take decision on the applications pending before the Adjudicating Authority. We make it clear that we are not entering into submissions of either of the parties on merit of the pending applications in this appeal and it is for the Adjudicating Authority to consider all the issues and take decision in accordance with law.
Subject to above, Appeal is dismissed.