IDBI Bank Limited vs Simm Samm Hotels Private Limited

IA(PLAN)/12/2025- The above IA is listed for pronouncement of the order. The same is pronounced in open court, vide a separate order.

The present Interlocutory Application has been filed on 18.01.2025 (refilled on 26.01.2025) by Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mishra, Resolution Professional of Simm Samm Hotels Private Limited (‘Corporate Debtor’) under Section 30(6) read with Section 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (‘the Code’) read with Regulation 39(4) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 (‘CIRP Regulation, 2016’) with following prayers:

In the 34^th meeting of the Committee of Creditors (‘CoC’) held on 06.10.2025, the CoC with 100% voting share, appointed Mr. Harish Kant Kaushik (IBBI Registration No. IBBI/IPA-001/IP-P-01469/2018-2019/12340) as the Resolution Professional of the Corporate Debtor, in place of the original Resolution Professional, Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mishra, who had resigned. Vide order dated 11.12.2025 passed in IA No. 5709 of 2025, this Tribunal allowed the substitution of Mr. Harish Kant Kaushik (‘the Applicant’) as the Resolution Professional of the Corporate Debtor in all IAs in CP No. 203 of 2021.

The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (‘CIRP’) of M/s. Simm Samm Hotels Private Limited (‘Corporate Debtor’) was initiated by this Tribunal vide order dated 12.04.2023 in CP (IB) No. 203 of 2021 under Section 7 of the Code (‘said order’). Pursuant to the said order, the Mr. Huzefa Fakhri Sitabkhan was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional (‘IRP’) of the Corporate Debtor. Thereafter, Public announcement in Form A was issued on 14.04.2023 inviting claims from the creditors of the Corporate Debtor, on or before 26.04.2023.

The IRP filed a report certifying the constitution of the Committee of Creditors (‘CoC’) on 04.05.2023, which was taken on record by this Tribunal vide order dated 12.05.2023 passed in IA/1895/2023. The composition of the constituted CoC, along with the admitted claims and voting shares of its members, is set out below:

In the 1^st CoC meeting on 11.05.2023, the CoC was informed about the appointment of the Registered Valuers for determination of the Liquidation Value and Fair Value of the Corporate Debtor. Thereafter, Fintech Valuation Advisory LLP and R&A Valuation LLP were appointed as Registered Valuers on 24.05.2023. Their respective valuation reports were received on 22.08.2023 and 18.09.2023. In the 6^th CoC meeting held on 25.09.2023, the CoC members expressed dissatisfaction with the valuations arrived at by the said Registered Valuers.

Thereafter, in the 9^th CoC meeting held on 20.12.2023, the CoC members decided not to consider the valuation exercise undertaken by the two Registered Valuers, as the values determined were lower than the valuations obtained by the lenders prior to commencement of the CIRP, and accordingly proposed the appointment of a third Registered Valuer. Pursuant thereto, GAA Advisory LLP was appointed as the third Registered Valuer and submitted its valuation report on 05.04.2024.

Subsequently, IDBI Bank filed IA No. 3172 of 2024, inter alia, seeking rejection of the valuation reports of the two Registered Valuers and consideration of the valuation report submitted by GAA Advisory LLP. Mr. Shammee Salaria, the erstwhile promoter of the Corporate Debtor, filed IA No. 2346 of 2024, inter alia, challenging the third valuation report and seeking copies of all three valuation reports. Vide order dated 04.03.2025 passed in IA No. 3172 of 2024, the Tribunal directed the Applicant to consider the third valuation carried out by GAA Advisory LLP, and consequently dismissed IA No. 2346 of 2024.

The Registered Valuer namely, GAA Advisory LLP submitted its Valuation Report on 06.04.2024. The summary of valuation by the registered valuers for properties of the Corporate Debtor as submitted is reproduced below:

(Amount in Rs. Crores)

In the 2^nd meeting on 06.06.2023, the Mr. Huzefa Fakhri Sitabkhan was appointed as the Resolution Professional (‘erstwhile RP’) of the Corporate Debtor, which was confirmed by this Authority vide order dated 18.07.2023 in IA. No. 2586 of 2023.

It is submitted that the Form G inviting Expressions of Interest (“EoI”) from the Prospective Resolution Applicants (‘PRAs’) was published on 11.06.2023 with last date of submission on 07.07.2023. Thereafter, upon request of the PRAs for extending the timeline for submission of EoI a revised Form G was issued on 08.07.2023, extending the last date for submission of EoIs to 15.07.2023.

Subsequently, upon receipt of the EoIs on 25.07.2023, the erstwhile RP issued a provisional list of PRAs. Thereafter, the final list of PRAs comprising twenty-eight (28) PRAs was issued on 05.08.2023.

It is submitted that the first Request for Resolution Plan (“RFRP”) was issued on 30.07.2023, with 15.09.2023 being fixed as the last date for submission of Resolution Plans by the PRAs. By the said date, the erstwhile RP had received Resolution Plans from three (3) Resolution Applicants. Subsequently, the Resolution Plans were opened during the 5^th CoC meeting held on 18.09.2023.

In 7^th CoC meeting held on 23.10.2023, the CoC voted for the replacement for the Erstwhile RP and consequently, the Applicant was appointed as the RP of the Corporate Debtor, which was confirmed by this Authority vide order dated 01.12.2023 in IA No. 4651 of 2023.

Pursuant to the 9^th CoC meeting held on 20.12.2023, wherein the CoC observed that the value offered by all three (3) Resolution Applicants was too low, the CoC consented to the publication of a fresh Form G. Consequently, the Applicant published Form G on 22.12.2023 and subsequently issued an updated Form G on 12.01.2024, inviting EoI from PRAs.

Pursuant to the issuance of Form G dated 12.01.2024, a provision list of thirty –six (36) PRAs was issued on 30.01.2024. The final list of thirty – five (35) PRAs was issued on 09.02.2024 which is as follows:

It is submitted that the RFRP, along with the Evaluation Matrix and Information Memorandum, was issued to the PRAs on 10.02.2024, and access to the Virtual Data Room (“VDR”) was provided on the same date to enable the PRAs to undertake due diligence of the business and operations of the Corporate Debtor.

It is submitted that multiple requests were received from the PRAs seeking extension of time for submission of the Resolution Plans. Accordingly, the timeline for submission of the Resolution Plans was initially extended from 11.03.2024 to 26.03.2024 and subsequently further extended to 05.04.2024.

During the 13^th Meeting on 06.04.2024, the Applicant informed the CoC about the resolution plans received from following six (6) PRAs:

a. Mr. Shrikant Badve b. Ashdan Properties Private Limited (“APPL”)

c. Consortium of Mr. Shammee Swaran Salaria, Mrs. Santosh Swaran Salaria, Mr. Swaran Nadhan Salaria (“Salaria Group”)

d. Rare Asset Reconstruction Limited (“RARE ARC”)

e. Mr. Ajay Malik f. Unison Hotels Private Limited (“UHPL”)

In the 16^th CoC meeting on 15.05.2024, the CoC approved the challenge mechanism framework dated 21.05.2024. It is further submitted that upon perusal of the Resolution Plan dated 05.04.2024 submitted by Rare Asset Reconstruction Limited (“Rare ARC”), it was observed that Rare ARC, being an Asset Reconstruction Company governed by the SARFAESI Act, had proposed to bring in an Investor at a later stage who would take over the shareholding of the Corporate Debtor, while Rare ARC would take over the debt by making payments to the creditors in accordance with the Resolution Plan and have the loans/claims assigned to it. Accordingly, the Applicant called upon Rare ARC to identify the proposed Investor, pursuant to which Rare ARC informed that Pacifica (India) Projects Private Limited (“Pacifica”) would be brought in as its Co-Applicant. Although no details of the Investor were provided and no consortium was constituted at the EoI stage, Clauses 1.8.5 and 1.8.6 of the RFRP empowered the CoC to approve changes in the composition of a Resolution Applicant, including inclusion of a Co-Applicant. Thereafter, Rare ARC submitted the requisite documents in respect of Pacifica, which was found eligible. Upon a legal opinion being obtained and circulated to the CoC members, the inclusion of Pacifica as Co-Applicant was deliberated and found legally permissible. Accordingly, at the 16^th CoC meeting held on 15.05.2024, both CoC members unanimously ratified and approved the inclusion of Pacifica as Co-Applicant with Rare ARC for submission of the Resolution Plan.

During the 19^th CoC meeting on 26.06.2024, the transaction auditor report dated 05.06.2024 was discussed and accordingly, the Applicant filed avoidance application under Section 45, 43 and 66 of the Code.

The Challenge Mechanism Process was conducted during the 18^th CoC meeting held on 11.06.2024. Accordingly, after multiple rounds of commercial bids submitted by the Resolution Applicants, the Challenge Mechanism Process was concluded successfully so as to achieve the goal of value maximisation as envisaged under the Code. Thereafter, the Resolution Applicant, Ashdan Properties Private Limited (“APPL”) had submitted their financial proposal in the challenge mechanism which was the highest as per the NPV calculated by the CoC's bid evaluation advisor during the challenge mechanism process.

In the 21^st to 24^th CoC meetings held between 30.07.2024 and 23.10.2024, the CoC considered and deliberated upon the final versions of the Resolution Plans submitted by the six (6) Resolution Applicants, along with the legal and compliance comments of the CoC’s Advisor and the Applicant’s Counsel, and undertook negotiations with the respective Resolution Applicants. Further, it was decided by the CoC members that all Resolution Applicants shall submit their revised resolution plans by 30.10.2024, the date of which was extended to 08.11.2024 and thereafter till 15.11.2024.

Thereafter, on 04.07.2024, the Consortium of Rare Asset Reconstruction Limited and Pacifica (India) Projects Private Limited submitted their amended Resolution Plan dated 04.07.2024 to the Applicant together with the consortium agreement dated 25.06.2024 executed between Rare Asset Reconstruction Limited and Pacifica (India) Projects Private Limited.

The Applicant submits that APPL submitted its revised Resolution Plan on 15.11.2024, which was found conditional and materially inconsistent with its Challenge Mechanism proposal, including reduced payout and altered payment and debt-assignment terms.

In the 25^th and 26^th CoC meetings on 26.11.2024 and 02.12.2024, respectively, the CoC found the plan submitted by APPL as uncertain, difficult to implement and non-compliant with the Code. Accordingly, considering the multiple opportunities already granted to APPL, no further opportunity was given, and APPL was informed on 04.12.2024 that its Resolution Plan was non-compliant.

During 26^th meeting on 02.12.2024, the CoC considered the five (5) compliant Resolution Plans submitted by (i) the Consortium of Mr. Shammee Swaran Salaria, Mrs. Santosh Swaran Salaria and Mr. Swaran Nadhan Salaria (“Consortium of Shammee Salaria & Ors.”), (ii) the Consortium of Rare Asset Reconstruction Limited and Pacifica (India) Projects Private Limited, (iii) Mr. Ajay Malik, (iv) Mr. Shrikant Badve, and (v) Unison Hotels Private Limited (“UHPL”).

In the said meeting, all the five (5) resolution plans were put to vote for the consideration. Upon conclusion of the voting on 09.01.2025, the Resolution Plan dated 05.04.2024, read with Revised Resolution Plan 04.07.2024, along with the addendum dated 29.10.2024, and clarification letter dated 26.11.2024, submitted by Consortium of Rare Asset Reconstruction Limited and Pacifica (India) Projects Private Limited, was approved with 100% of voting share. The relevant extract of the Resolution passed by the CoC with voting share are reproduced hereunder for ease of reference:

The Letter of Intent (“LoI”) to the Resolution Applicant was issued on 10.01.2025, which was accepted by the Resolution Applicant on 15.01.2025. 29.The Applicant submits that the Successful Resolution Applicant (“SRA”), namely the Consortium of Rare Asset Reconstruction Limited and Pacifica (India) Projects Private Limited, is not disqualified under Section 29A of the Code from submitting a Resolution Plan, as evidenced by the affidavit and undertaking furnished by Rare Asset Reconstruction Limited and Pacifica (India) Projects Private Limited under Section 29A of the Code dated and 05.04.2024 and 03.05.2024, respectively, along with the Due Diligence Reports issued by JLN US & Co., Chartered Accountants, dated 02.05.2024 and 21.05.2024 in respect of Rare Asset Reconstruction Limited and Pacifica (India) Projects Private Limited, respectively.

The Applicant submits the approved Resolution Plan along with the addendum dated 29.10.2024 and clarification letter dated 26.11.2024 is compliant with the Code read with CIRP Regulations. The applicant submits that in compliance with Resolution 39(4) of the CIRP Regulations, a compliance certificate in revised Form H by way of an Additional Affidavit dated 23.05.2025 was submitted.

Brief Background of the Successful Resolution Applicant (SRA): Consortium of Rare Asset Reconstruction Limited and Pacifica (India) Projects Private Limited

Rare ARC is a publicly held company, incorporated in September, 2015.

Pacifica (India) Projects Private Limited is a privately held real estate company and has been in the real estate arena since 80s. The company is headquartered in San Diego, California and has offices throughout United States and India. Pacifica has investment track record of more than $7.7 billion by assets class and employees nearly 3000 people approximately. Pacifica India is a multitalented and vibrant real estate conglomerate, committed to modernizing the urban landscape of India.

It is submitted that the SRA placed the Addendum dated 29.10.2024 to the Resolution Plan dated 04.07.2024 which is set out hereinbelow:

CIRP Cost

The Resolution Plan stipulated the CIRP Cost. As per the plan, the CIRP Cost is estimated to be approximately Rs. 1.28 crores and is proposed to be paid in priority to payment for other debt, within 90 days of the NCLT approval.

However, in case of any further/additional cost towards CIRP, any additional amount, if payable shall be filed out of payment proposed to be paid to Secured Financial Creditors.

The Allocation of amounts proposed under the plan is reproduced below:

(Amount in Rs. Crore)

Particulars Admitted Amount Within 90 Within 6 Within 12 Claim Proposed days from months from months from under

Source of funds

The Resolution Applicant has proposed to infuse an amount of Rs. 5 Crore towards working capital and Rs. 10 Crore towards capex requirements.

Pacifica (India) Projects Private Limited (Co-applicant) will infuse sum of Rs.

4 Crores towards equity share of the Corporate Debtor. Co-applicant proposes to subscribe to 40 Lakhs equity share of Rs. 10 each, at par, within 180 days of the approval of the Resolution plan.

As per the RFRP which stipulates that All Resolution Applicants shall provide along with or prior to submission of their Resolution Plan, an amount of Rs.

50,00,000/- (Indian Rupees Fifty Lakh Only) by way of a direct transfer through real time gross settlement (“RTGS”) system into a bank account held by Simm Samm Hotels Private Limited, the details of which is stated below for ready reference (referred to as “Earnest Money Deposit”/ “EMD”). This EMD amount shall be an interest free deposit maintained in the name of Corporate Debtor.

The Earnest Money Deposit of the Resolution Applicant who has not been selected as the Successful Resolution Applicant, shall be returned (without interest) to the Resolution Applicant, upon receipt of written request from the Resolution Applicant for refund, on or before the later of (i) thirty (30) days from the closure of the Resolution Plan Submission Process in the event no Resolution Applicant has been declared as a Successful Resolution Applicant; or (ii) thirty (30) days of declaration of Successful Resolution Applicant, unless such Earnest Money has been invoked/forfeited; and (iii) If the Successful Resolution Plan is approved by the CoC in accordance with Section 30(4) of the Code, the Earnest Money Deposit of the Successful Resolution Applicant shall be returned, within ten (10) days, upon satisfaction of all the following conditions: (a) submission of Performance Security by the Successful Resolution Applicant; and (b) signing of Lol by the Successful Resolution Applicant.

The Resolution Applicant deposited an EMD of Rs. 50,00,000/- by way of direct transfer through the Real Time Gross Settlement (RTGS) system into the bank account of the Corporate Debtor along with the Resolution Plan on 05.04.2024. Subsequently, upon approval of the Resolution Plan by the CoC, the Applicant refunded the EMD of Rs. 50,00,000/- to the Resolution Applicant on 28.01.2025.

As per RFRP (clause 1.10, Page 31 of RFRP), it stipulates that the Successful Resolution Applicant shall furnish in the form of a performance bank guarantee issued by any scheduled commercial bank in India, or a demand draft, in favour of IDBI Bank Limited, in its capacity as the member of CoC, issued by any scheduled commercial bank in India, or by way of a direct deposit by way of the real time gross settlement system into such bank account as intimated, the details of which shall be shared separately with the Resolution Applicant(s), of an amount of Rs. 5,00,00,000/-, within 03 (Three) Business Days of issuance of LoI by the CoC or such other extended or shortened date as may be notified by the Resolution Professional in prior consultation with the CoC (“Performance Security”).

It is submitted that the Resolution Applicant furnished Performance Security in the form of a Bank Guarantee of Rs. 5,00,00,000/- in favour of IDBI Bank Limited, issued on 13.01.2025, bearing Bank Guarantee No. 0189NDDG00017925.

The Monitoring Committee (‘MC’) shall be constituted within seven (7) days of approval of the Resolution Plan by the Tribunal to ensure that the Resolution Applicant is making payments as per the approved Resolution Plan to various stakeholders and is also taking effective steps to implement the Resolution Plan.

The composition of the MC will be as follows:

The Resolution Professional shall chair the MC without voting rights. The fee payable to the Resolution Professional for his role as member of the MC shall be decided in consultation with the members of the MC and the same shall be borne by Resolution Applicant.

From the NCLT Approval Date till the implementation of the proposed Transaction under the Resolution Plan i.e. payment of the committed cash payment amount to the Secured Financial Creditors (Lenders), Monitoring Committee shall supervise the implementation of the Resolution Plan with the help of the newly constituted board.

The Resolution Professional/Monitoring Committee shall handover the management control of the Corporate Debtor to the Co-applicant on the payments of 1^st Trance to Secured Financial Creditors. The existing board of the Corporate Debtor is proposed to be replace by Co-applicant (Pacifica (India) Projects Private Limited) having two (2) directors and Rare Arc, having one nominee Director on the board to manage the company.

The new board nominated shall be responsible for the supervision of the day to day affairs of the Corporate Debtor including the payment to the Financial and other Creditors. The new board shall take over management control of the Corporate Debtor including possession of CD’s assets, immediately after the payment of First tranche to Secured Financial Creditors (“Take over Date”) i.e., 90 days of NCLT Approval Date.

Pacifica (India) Projects Private Limited shall identify and appoint a suitable professional to manage the affairs of the Company on a day to day basis, with the support of the key managerial personnel of the Company and with guidance from the Board of Directors.

Upon approval of the Resolution Plan, the entire existing share capital of the Corporate Debtor shall stand cancelled and the existing equity share capital of Rs. 9.63 crores shall stand reduced to NIL, whereupon there would be simultaneous allotment of fresh equity share by the Board of directors of the Corporate Debtor to the new shareholders.

All the rights of the existing shareholders shall stand suspended till the cancellation of the existing paid up capital.

Post allotment of equity, the co-applicant namely, Pacifica (India) Projects Private Limited and its nominee shall continue to hold the entire share capital of the Corporate Debtor until the entire payment as envisaged under the Plan have been completed.

Pursuant to Regulation 39(4) of the IBBI (CIRP) Regulations, 2016, the Applicant/Resolution Professional submitted the Compliance Certificate in revised Form H by way of an Additional Affidavit dated 23.05.2025.

Compliance of mandatory requirements under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016:

Compliance under mandatory requirements under IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process of Corporate Debtor) Regulations, 2016:

The CIRP has been conducted as per the timeline indicated as under:

As per the interim order dated 20.01.2025 in IA No. 5388/2024, the Resolution Professional sought condonation of delay from 31.10.2024 to 09.12.2024 and an extension of 45 days from 09.12.2024. The said period was condoned and extension of 45 days was duly approved by this Tribunal. It is noted that the present Interlocutory Application seeking approval of the Resolution Plan was filed on 18.01.2025; therefore, the application has been filed within the extended CIRP period.

The Applicant filed IA No. 1340/2025, IA No. 4590/2024 and IA No. 4591/2024 on 19.02.2025, 09.09.2024 and 09.09.2024, respectively, seeking avoidance of certain transaction falling within the ambit of Section 66(1), 45 and 43 of the Code, respectively. The said applications are pending and yet to be adjudicated.

In any event, any transaction is avoided/set aside by the NCLT in terms of Section 43,45,47,49,50 or 66 of the Code and any amount is received by the Resolution Professional or the Corporate Debtor in furtherance thereof, such sum shall be deemed to have been received for the benefit of the Secured Financial Creditors and shall be paid to the secured financial creditors (“Pass Through Amount”). For the Avoidance of doubt, the pass-through amount shall be paid to the Secured Financial Creditors in addition to the pay out envisaged for the Secured Financial Creditors under this Resolution Plan. Further, Secured Financial Creditors may pursue the avoidance applications after the approval of the Resolution Plan by NCLT.

However, in case Financial Creditors/CoC decides that Resolution Applicant shall pursue these cases then Resolution Applicant shall ensure that all the actions initiated pursuant to Section 43,45,47,49,50 or 66 of the Code shall be pursued and the Corporate Debtor and the Resolution Applicant shall ensure all cooperation is provided for such actions being pursued at all times even after the approval of the resolution plan by the Adjudicating Authority. In such situation, Resolution Applicant shall bear the costs (however subject to reimbursement of expenses on realization by Secured Financial Creditors) to pursue avoidance application post approval of Resolution Plan by NCLT. It is to be noted that any such Pass-Through Amount will be allocated to Secured Financial Creditors in proportion of their Admitted Claims to Total Admitted Claims of Secured Financial Creditors.

When the matter had come up for consideration on 24.08.2026, the following order was passed:

In compliance with the aforesaid order, the Applicant filed an Affidavit dated 27.08.2026. It is submitted that the third valuation report dated 06.04.2024 did not cause any prejudice to the Resolution Applicants as the Fair Value was not disclosed to them pursuant to the unanimous decision of the CoC taken in its 15^th meeting held on 02.05.2024 under Regulation 36(2)(ka) of the CIRP Regulations. The Resolution Plans were initially received on 05.04.2024, and all eligible PRAs had been afforded adequate opportunity to undertake due diligence and submit their respective Resolution Plans. Thereafter, the PRAs were afforded further opportunities to revise and improve their Resolution Plans, including through the Challenge Mechanism Process conducted on 11.06.2024 and subsequent negotiations which concluded in the submission of final Resolution Plans by 30.10.2024. Accordingly, it is submitted that the resolution process was conducted in a fair and transparent manner, without causing any prejudice or informational advantage to any PRAs.

On perusal of Form-H, it is seen that the Resolution Plan is in compliance with the mandatory compliances as stipulated under Section 30(2) of the Code. The SRA (Consortium of Rare Asset Reconstruction Limited and Pacifica (India) Projects Private Limited) has submitted an affidavit under Section 29 A of the Code dated 05.04.2024 (Rare Asset Reconstruction Limited) and 03.05.2024 (Pacifica (India) Projects Private Limited), as attached as ‘QQ4 – QQ5’ (Page – 904 - 1052)’ along with the Due Diligence Report dated 02.05.2024 and 21.05.2024 in respect of Rare Asset Reconstruction Limited and Pacifica (India) Projects Private Limited, respectively by the JLN US & Co., Chartered Accountants is annexed as ‘C’ and ‘D’ (Page – 54-182 of Additional Affidavit dated 23.05.2025), stating that neither the Resolution Applicant nor any person connected to it, as defined under the Code, is ineligible under Section 29A of the Code. Accordingly, the Resolution Plan is not in contravention of any of the provisions of Section 29A of the Code and is in accordance with law.

In K Sashidhar v. Indian Overseas Bank & Others (2019) 12 SCC 150, the Hon’ble Apex Court held that if the CoC had approved the Resolution Plan by requisite percent of voting share, then as per section 30(6) of the Code, it is imperative for the Resolution Professional to submit the same to the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT). On receipt of such a proposal, the Adjudicating Authority is required to satisfy itself that the Resolution Plan, as approved by CoC, meets the requirements specified in Section 30(2). The Hon’ble Apex Court further observed that the role of the NCLT is ‘no more and no less’. The Hon’ble Apex Court further held that the discretion of the Adjudicating Authority is circumscribed by Section 31 and is limited to scrutiny of the Resolution Plan “as approved” by the requisite percent of voting share of financial creditors. Even in that enquiry, the grounds on which the Adjudicating Authority can reject the Resolution Plan is in reference to matters specified in Section 30(2) when the Resolution Plan does not conform to the stated requirements.

In view of the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court, the commercial wisdom of the COC is to be given paramount importance for approval / rejection of the resolution plan. As the Resolution Plan meets the requirements of the Code and the IBBI (CIRP) Regulations, 2016 the same needs to be approved. Accordingly, the Resolution Plan is approved with the following directions:

Accordingly, the Resolution Plan 04.07.2024, along with addendum dated 18.06.2026 submitted by Consortium of Rare Asset Reconstruction Limited and Pacifica (India) Projects Private Limited is hereby approved, and I.A. (Plan) No. 12 of 2025 is allowed to the extent above and is disposed of.