Ms. Sharad S. Heda & Anr. vs M/s. Unishire Lifestyle Dwellings LLP

The Company Petition CP(IB) No. 32/BB/2020 was filed by Financial Creditors i.e. Mr. Sharad S. Heda and Mr. Sameer Heda, under Section 7 of the IBC for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) against M/s Unishire Lifestyle Dwellings LLP (“Corporate Debtor”) and the same was admitted by this Authority vide order dated 08.03.2022, and Shri Ratnakar Shetty was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional of the Corporate Debtor and he was directed to take necessary actions in accordance with relevant provisions of the Code and Regulations made thereunder.

In compliance of Regulation 6 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 (CIRP Regulations”), the Applicant issued a Public Announcement in Form A on 17.03.2022, calling upon creditors of the Corporate Debtor to submit their claims to the Applicant on or before 30.03.2022. Pursuant to the collation of all claims, the Applicant has prepared the list of creditors of the Corporate Debtor.

In the 1^st meeting CoC of the Corporate Debtor held on 14.04.2022, the IRP was confirmed as the Resolution Professional of the Corporate Debtor (“RP”) and I.A No. 157 of 2022 was filed and his such appointment was approved vide order dated 05.05.2022. Further, the CoC in its 1^st meeting also deliberated and approved the appointment of Mr. Narayana Kamma as the Authorised Representative of “allotees under Real Estate” class of Financial Creditors and I.A No. 164 of 2022 filed in this behalf under Regulation 16A (2) of IBBI (IRP for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 was allowed on 30.05.2022.

The CoC in its 2^nd meeting held on 01.06.2022 approved the publication of Form-G for invitation of Expression of Interest as well as the eligibility criteria for the same and authorized the RP to publish the same. Accordingly, the approved publication of EoI in prescribed ‘Form G’ was carried in English newspaper (Financial Express) and a Kannada newspaper (Vartha Bharati) on 06.06.2022 and the last date for submission of expression of interest was fixed for 24.06.2022.

Thereafter, on 07.07.2022, at the third meeting of the CoC of the Corporate Debtor, the RP presented the evaluation matrix before the CoC, with a view to facilitate the CoC to evaluate all the resolution plans, in view of Regulation 39(3)(a) of the CIRP Regulations. Further the RP also asked the CoC members to deliberate and determine the amount of Performance Security to be received from the Prospective Resolution Applicant. The CoC approved (i) Evaluation Matrix for the Consideration of Resolution Plan, (ii) the Refundable deposit/Binding Submission Bond Guarantee of Rs.10,00,000 and Performance Guarantee amounting to Rs.25,00,000 and 0.5% of value of the Resolution Plan, whichever is higher.

The RP had appointed two Registered Valuers in terms of Regulation 27 of the CIRP Regulations, 2016 and the values determined by them are tabled below: -Name of the Registered Class Fair Value Liquidation Valuer: - (In Rs.) Value (in Rs.) SVEE Valuation and Land and Buildings 12,00,00,000 7,85,00,000 Advisory LLP S.J. Ranganatha Land and Buildings 13,00,00,000 8,52,00,000 Venkata Subbarao Kalva Securities or Financial Assets 1,41,62,991 2,19,475 Rajesh Yanamandram Securities or Financial Assets 1,41,79,248 2,19,475

Form-G stipulated that the last date for submission of the resolution plans was 10.08.2022 and the CIRP was required to be concluded on 04.09.2022. However, at the fourth meeting of the CoC of the Corporate Debtor held on 08.08.2022, the CoC approved (i) the extension of the time for submission of the resolution plan from 10.08.2022 to 24.09.2022; and (ii) the extension of the period of the CIRP by 90 days from 05.09.2022 to 04.12.2022. The Prospective Resolution Applicants requested further time till 10.10.2022 for the submission of Resolution Plans and the same was approved by the majority of CoC through email and ratified in the fifth meeting of the CoC held on 21.10.2022.

The RP had filed I.A No.365 of 2022 for extension of the period of the CIRP by 90 days from 05.09.2022 to 04.12.2022 which was allowed by this Authority on 06.12.2022.

Further, during the 5^th CoC meeting held on 21.10.2022, based on the requests of the Prospective Resolution Applicants, the CoC once again approved the extension for the submission of the resolution plan from 10.10.2022 to 17.10.2022. At the same meeting, the RP informed the CoC that he has received two resolution plans for the revival of the Corporate Debtor. The Resolution Professional opened the two sealed resolution plans in presence of the CoC members and the said 2 plans were sent to Prakul and Kunwarpreet LLP for Section 29A IBC Due-Diligence and examination of both the Resolution Plans as approved by the CoC.

At the sixth meeting of the CoC of the Corporate Debtor held on 11.11.2022, the Resolution Professional invited both the Prospective Resolution Applicants i.e. Srinivasalu Sandireddy and SA Enterprises to present the key terms of each of their resolution plans in the meeting, for the consideration of the members of the CoC. Each of these Resolution plans were discussed and deliberated upon by the CoC wherein the Applicant and the members asked both the Resolution Applicants that certain changes were required to be made by both the Resolution Applicants in their plans to be compliant with the provisions of the IBC and the CIRP Regulations. The RP also informed the members that he had apprised the respective resolution applicants of the amendments required for compliance under the IBC and the CIRP Regulations.

In the seventh meeting of the CoC on 28.11.2022 the RP apprised the members that after considering the suggestions of the CoC expressed on 11.11.2022, both the Resolution Applicants had submitted the 1^st revised resolution plans and the applicant tabled the 1^st revised resolution plans before the CoC for deliberation. The members of the CoC deliberated on the revised resolution plans submitted by both the Resolution Applicants i.e. Srinivasalu Sandireddy and SA Enterprises. The CoC approved the 1^st revised resolution plan of SA Enterprises with 91.88% of the total voting share having voted in favour of the same while remaining members were absent and abstained from voting. The minutes of seventh meeting of CoC has been filed vide Diary No.4584 dated 02.08.2024.

The RP had filed an I.A. No. 18 of 2023 for approval of the resolution plan under Section 30 (6) of the IBC, 2016, r/w Regulation 39 of the CIRP Regulations, 2016 before this Authority. In the eighth COC meeting dated 20.07.2022 RP had apprised the members for the need of filing an Application to the Adjudicating Authority for excluding thirty days from the CIRP Period since there was a delay in getting possession of land by RP from the landowner and thus the members approved and authorised the applicant to file an application for exclusion of a period not exceeding 30 days from the CIRP period and I.A No. 13 of 2023 was filed seeking of a period of 19 days i.e. from 05.12.2022 to 23.12.2022 from the CIRP Period which was allowed vide order dated 06.01.2023.

This Authority vide order dated 20.09.2024 had directed the RP for justification for the resolution plan considering the below condition

On 23.10.2024, the RP had informed that in view of order passed on 28.03.2024 in I.A No.285 of 2022, the matter is resolved and the aforesaid condition mentioned in the resolution plan has been removed by the SRA. In view of the legal proposition laid in M.K Rajagopalan v. Dr Periasamy Palani (2023) SCC OnLine SC 298, any modification/change in the resolution plan must be approved by the CoC before submitting the same to the Adjudicating Authority, the RP was directed to file revised Resolution Plan after approval from the CoC.

M/s SA Enterprises thereafter submitted the revised Resolution Plan on which tenth meeting of the CoC of the Corporate Debtor was convened for 09.11.2024. In the said meeting, the Resolution Professional informed the CoC member that in the revised resolution plan submitted by M/s SA Enterprises on 06^th November 2024 the condition of handing over a freehold land from the plan has been removed & para 3(viii) has been added to accommodate any new claim subject to the Court order.

Thereafter, in the 10^th Meeting of the CoC, the revised resolution plan was deliberated at length and as instructed by the CoC, the revised Resolution Plan was put for e-voting, which commenced on at 12.11.2024 at 08:00 A.M and closed on 14.11.2024 at 05:00 P.M. wherein, the revised Resolution Plan submitted by M/s SA Enterprises, Successful Resolution Applicant, was approved by the CoC members with 91.7293% vote. The remaining CoC members holding 8.2707 percent voting shares did not participate in voting. The minutes of the 10^th meeting of the CoC along with the voting result was filed on 18.11.2024 with Diary No. 6462 with revised resolution plan.

The Resolution Plan submitted by M/s SA Enterprises states that as per the Information Memorandum provided by the Resolution Professional, the details of claims submitted by the Financial Creditors and Operational Creditors along with claims of Financial Creditors and Operational Creditors admitted by the Resolution Professional of the Corporate Debtor as updated up to date of Resolution Plan are as under: S.No. Particulars Claims Claims submitted admitted HOME BUYERS

The SRA states that as per Resolution Professional the estimated CIRP cost would Rs.39,00,000. The SRA further undertook that the actual CIRP cost shall be paid in full in priority to all other dues, in the manner as specified by the IBBI within 10 working days of date of commencement of implementation of the Resolution Plan.

The Resolution Applicant proposes to pay to Operational Creditors INR 21,85,925/- (Rupees Twenty-One Lakhs Eighty-Five Thousand Nine Hundred Twenty-Five Only) (“Settlement Amount for Operational Creditors”) to be distributed in accordance with priority mentioned under Section 53(1) IBC and extent of amount that would be due to the Operational Creditors within 30 working days of date of commencement of implementation of the Resolution Plan. It is further submitted that as per the Information Memorandum, no claims have been made by any workmen and employees therefore there are NIL dues of workmen or employees.

It is submitted that the Resolution Applicant proposes to acquire ownership of the Corporate Debtor through a transfer of 100% share by existing Partners to the Resolution Applicant at a nominal value of Rs.1 since net-worth of Project LLP (Corporate Debtor) is negative and restructure total admitted claims of the Corporate Debtor.

The Resolution Applicant shall infuse equity to the extent of Rs.3.5 Crores (Rupees Three Crores and Fifty Lakhs only) within fifteen working-days of commencement of implementation of the Resolution-Plan duly approved by this Authority and the said equity shall be used to settle CIRP costs and agreed interest on CIRP costs on priority and also be used to pay for building sanction-plan approval, commencement-certificate, temporary utility connections and other permits required for commencing construction. The Resolution Applicant shall also infuse through their network of investors, amounts up to Rs 10 Crores (Rupees Ten Crores only) which shall be mobilised through advance-sales of the Project LLP’s share of the saleable area to commence construction work on the Project. RA shall arrange to provide comfort-letters from the prospective identified investors. Further, as per the Resolution Plan submitted, the total payout towards settlement of CIRP costs and claims of creditors is as below:

The total Resolution Plan value is Rs. 9,15,73,965 out of which Rs. 3,45,36,586 will be utilized for repayment to Unsecured Financial Creditors, Rs.5,09,51,454 will be used for settling the claims of Homebuyers and Rs. 21,85,925 will be utilized for repayment of statutory dues. It is further submitted that any realisations from assets of the Corporate Debtor excluding realisations from Second Party to the JDA and realisations from avoidance-transactions shall be shared net of recovery/collection-costs between the RA and Financial Creditors including Home-buyers in the ratio of 60:40 respectively. The sharing of realisations between Unsecured Financial Creditors and Home-Buyers shall be in the proportion that their respective admitted interest claim bears to the total admitted interest claim.

The Resolution plan also states that any additional claims/new claims admitted from financial creditors pursuant to the order of the adjudicating authority or any competent authority shall be paid from the above proposed amount of Rs. 8,54,88,040 (amount proposed to financial creditors including financial creditors in a class i.e. home-buyers) on a proportionate basis. However, any other claims against the Corporate Debtor including statutory, criminal, civil, contingent, disputed, any other claims/litigations, any guarantees provided by the Corporate Debtor to other Parties, any payables to parties who were related or who continue to be related with the Corporate Debtor shall be extinguished before the date of commencement of the Resolution Plan. Further, all legal proceedings of every nature against the Corporate Debtor shall be quashed. and stand extinguished.

It is submitted that upon the Approval of the Resolution Plan by this Adjudicating Authority, the Resolution Applicant shall appoint a Resolution Plan Monitoring Committee comprising of 4 (Four) persons of which 1 (one) is the Resolution Professional of the Corporate Debtor, 1 (One) representative of the Resolution Applicant, 1 (One) representative from the Homebuyers, and 1 (One) Representative from the Unsecured Financial Creditors. The Resolution Plan Monitoring Committee shall have the responsibility of monitoring the implementations of this Resolution Plan, during the term of the Plan.

Further, the Resolution Professional shall handover the project Land to the Successful Resolution Applicant and the Successful Resolution Applicant along with Resolution Plan Monitoring Committee will work on implementation of the Resolution Plan and that the term of the plan shall commence once the same is approved by this Authority and the implementation thereof shall continue for the period until the complete implementation of terms as envisaged under the Resolution Plan in accordance with Regulation 38(2)(a) and Regulation 38(2)(c) of the CIRP Regulations.

It is submitted by the SRA in the Resolution Plan that neither the Resolution Applicant nor any of its related parties have failed to implement or contributed to the failure of implementation of any other resolution plan approved by the Adjudicating Authority at any time in the past in accordance with Regulation 38 (1B) of the CIRP Regulations.

It is submitted that in accordance with Section 30(2) (e) of the IBC the Resolution Plan does not contravene any of the provisions of the law for the time being in force. It is submitted that the requirement to pay the operational creditors in priority over the financial creditors in accordance with Regulation 38(1)(a) of the Code does not arise, as there are no Operational Creditors other than statutory authorities and the statutory authorities shall be paid in priority over financial creditors who voted in favour of the plan. The plan deals with the interest of all the stakeholders, including financial creditors and the Operational Creditors of the Corporate Debtor as per the Regulation 38(1A) of the CIRP Regulations, 2016.

It is submitted that the Resolution Plan provides that the term of the plan implementation schedule in accordance with Regulation 38(2)(a) of the CIRP Regulations shall be as tabled below: -Nature of Approval/Milestone Estimated Timeline and Relevant Laws Date of Commencement of Implementation Handover of Project-Land to the Resolution Applicant after approval from the Hon'ble National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Approval of Building-Plan by competent 6 (six) months from date of approval-authority being Bruhat Bangalore commencement of implementation as per Mahanagar Palike (BBMP) BBMP Bye-Laws Approval of Project under Karnataka- 3 (three) months from date of receipt of RERA approved building-plan as per the Karnataka RERA Act Commencement of construction foundation 6 (six) months from date of receipt of post excavation on receipt of the approval from Karnataka-RERA as per Commencement Certificate (CC) from BBMP Bye-laws Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagar Palike (BBMP) Completion of project including handover 30 (thirty) months from date of receipt of Occupancy Certificate from competent | of| commencement certificate (CC) from commencement certificate (CC) from Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagar Palike Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagar Palike (BBMP) as per BBMP Bye-Laws (BBMP)

It is submitted that the Resolution Plan, in accordance with Regulation 38(3) of the CIRP Regulations, demonstrates that it (a) addresses the cause of default;

it is feasible and viable; (c) it has provisions for its effective implementation; (d) it has provisions for approvals required and the timeline for the same; and (e) the resolution applicant has the capability to implement the Resolution Plan.

It is submitted that in accordance with Section 30 (1) of the IBC, the Successful Resolution Applicant, M/s SA Enterprises, has submitted an affidavit, declaring that the SRA is eligible under Section 29A of the Code to submit the Resolution Plan. Further, Due- Diligence Report also states that/s SA Enterprises is eligible under Section 29A of the Code to submit the Resolution Plan.

All the requirements under the Code and CIRP Regulations have been duly complied with, and that the Resolution Plan may be approved in accordance with law. Moreover, in accordance with Regulation 36B (4A) of the CIRP Regulations, the Resolution Applicant, vide compliance memo filed on 11.11.2024 has furnished the performance security amounting to Rs.25,00,000 in lieu of the Bank Guarantee.

who voted N/A N/A N/A N/A in favour of the resolution plan Total[(a) + (b)] - - - -2 Unsecured (a) Creditors N/A N/A N/A N/A Financial not having a Creditors right to vote under sub-section (2) of section 21

Other than N/A N/A N/A N/A (a) above:

who did not N/A N/A N/A N/A vote in favour of the resolution Plan

who voted 36,55,25,367 24,62,65,398 8,54,88,040 23.39% in favour of the resolution plan Total[(a) + (b)] 36,55,25,367 24,62,65,398 8,54,88,040 23.39% 3 Operational (a) Related N/A N/A N/A N/A Creditors Party of the Corporate Debtor

Other than - - - -

above: (i)Government 41,39,223 41,39,223 21,85,925 52.81% (ii)Workmen/C - - -asual Employees (iii)Employees - - -

Others - - -Total[(a) + (b)] 41,39,223 41,39,223 21,85,925 52.81% 4 Other debts - - - -and dues Grand Total 36,96,64,590 25,04,04,621 8,76,73,965 23.72% **Amount provided over time under the Resolution Plan and includes estimated value of non-cash components. It is not NPV.

provides for the payment of insolvency 3.5(vi) YES resolution process costs?

provides for the payment to the operational 3.5(vi) YES creditors?

provides for the payment to the financial 3.5 (vi) YES creditors who did not vote in favour of the resolution plan?

provides for the management of the affairs of 6.2 r/w YES the corporate debtor? Annexure-2

provides for the implementation and supervision of the resolution plan? 4 YES

contravenes any of the provisions of the law for the time being in force? 6.6 NO Section 30 (4) Whether the Resolution Plan:

is feasible and viable, according to the CoC? Clause-3 YES

has been approved by the CoC with 66% voting Approved YES share? with 91.73% voting Section 31 (1) Whether the Resolution Plan has provisions for its Clause 5, r/w YES effective implementation plan, according to the Clause 4 CoC? Regulation 38 (1) Whether the amount due to the operational creditors 3.5 (vi) YES under the resolution plan has been given priority in payment over financial creditors? Regulation 38 Whether the resolution plan includes a statement as 3.5 (vi) YES (1A) to how it has dealt with the interests of all stakeholders? Regulation 38 (i) Whether the Resolution Applicant or any of its 6.4 NO. (1B) related parties has failed to implement or contributed to the failure of implementation of any resolution plan approved under the Code. N. A

If so, whether the Resolution Applicant has N.A. submitted the statement giving details of such non-implementation? Regulation 38 (2) Whether the Resolution Plan provides:

the term of the plan and its implementation 5 YES schedule?

for the management and control of the business 6.2 read with YES of the corporate debtor during its term? Annexure-2

adequate means for supervising its implementation? 4 YES Regulation 38 (3) Whether the resolution plan demonstrates that –

it addresses the cause of default 6.5 r/w 2 & 3 YES

It is feasible and viable? 3.3, 3.4 and 6.3 YES

it has provisions for its effective 4 & 5 YES implementation?

it has provisions for approvals required and 5 YES the timeline for the same?

the resolution applicant has the capability to implement the resolution plan? 3.5 (v) r/w YES Annexure-4 Regulation 39 (2) Whether the RP has filed applications in respect of 3.5 (Vii) YES transactions observed, found or determined by him? Regulation 39 (4) Provide details of performance security received, as Fund has YES referred to in sub-regulation (4A) of regulation been 36B.] transferred to the bank account of Corporate Debtor

Regulation 38 (1): Clause 3.5 of the Resolution Plan states that in accordance with Section 30 (2) (b) read with Regulation 38 (1) of the CIRP Regulations, 2016, the Resolution Plan provides for the payment of Operational Creditors so that the payment to Operational Creditors shall be in priority to payments to Financial Creditors and such amounts shall not be less than the amount to be paid to such creditors in the event of liquidation of the corporate debtor under Section 53 or the amount that would have been paid to such Operational Creditors, if the amount to be distributed under the Resolution Plan had been distributed in accordance with the order of priority under Section 53 (1), whichever is higher and same will be paid within 10 (Ten) working days of date of commencement of implementation of the Resolution Plan.

Regulation 38 (1A): The Resolution Applicant in clause 3.5 (Vi) of the Resolution Plan confirms that the interests of all the stakeholders of Corporate Debtor are duly covered by the Resolution Applicant, after taking into consideration that the Corporate Debtor is a Real Estate Project and adhering to the requirements set out under the Code and the payments due to the creditors of the Corporate Debtor shall be made by Resolution Applicant, in the manner indicated below: -

Regulation 38(1B): Under Regulation 38(1B) of CIRP Regulations, the Resolution Applicant in clause 6.4 of the Resolution Plan states that the Resolution Applicant or any of its related parties has not failed to implement or contributed to the failure of implementation of any resolution plan approved by the adjudicating authority under the Code. at any time in the past. Additionally, the Applicant has filed Section 29A Affidavit of the Resolution Applicant dt. 23.11.2024 on 02.12.2024 vide Diary No. 6799.

Regulation 38(3)(a): This Adjudicating Authority vide order dated 11.02.2025 had directed the Applicant to explain the causes of default of the Corporate Debtor and the applicant on 25.02.2025 vide Diary No.1020 filed an affidavit wherein the Successful Resolution Applicant explained that the cause of default of the Corporate Debtor was because of the financial distress faced by the Corporate Debtor primarily due to non-issuance of the plan sanction from BBMP despite obtaining approvals from other statutory authorities, Financial distress of other group entities and default of the group entities in servicing their loans, absence of liquidity support from group entities and the non-sustainability of raising money from individual investors at high interest rates which became non-sustainable due to non-receipt of Plan Sanction for commencement of the Project.

Regulation 38(3)(b): This Authority vide order dated 11.02.2025 had directed the Applicant to explain how the Resolution Plan submitted by the Successful Resolution Applicant is feasible and viable and the RP/applicant on 25.02.2025 vide Diary No.1020 filed an affidavit wherein the Successful Resolution Applicant explained that SRA has carefully designed the Resolution Plan ensuring its feasibility, viability, and compliance with the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The key aspects of the plan are that financial strength of the Net Worth of the SRA is Rs. 90.82 crores, the SRA’s sister concern, M/s. S.A Lifestyle Private Limited, has also undertaken to provide additional Financial Assistance and the SRA has already obtained in-principal sanction from the financial institution. Further, the financial resources and execution capabilities of the SRA are adequate to ensure the successful completion of the project and revive the Corporate Debtor and therefore the Resolution Plan is feasible, viable, and capable of implementation as per the terms approved by the Committee of Creditors.

Regulation 38(3)(c): The Clause 4 of the Resolution Plan provides for the implementation and supervision of the resolution plan. The Resolution Applicant shall appoint a Resolution Plan Monitoring Committee (“RPMC”) comprising of 4 members, i.e. the Resolution Professional of the Corporate Debtor and will have 1 representative each from the Unsecured Financial Creditors and Homebuyers and One member from the Resolution Applicant. The RPMC shall supervise and monitor implementation of the terms of the Resolution-Plan post approval by the Adjudicating Authority. Further Clause 6.2 of the Resolution Plan states that after the Resolution Plan is approved by the Adjudicating Authority, the Corporate Debtor shall be managed by a qualified and experienced team headed by the Resolution-Applicant who shall also engage qualified Consultants to report on performance and compliances of the Project.

Regulations 38(3)(d): The time-line for approvals of Resolution Plan is stated in Clause 5 of the Resolution Plan. On the approval of the Resolution Plan, the Resolution Applicant through the Corporate Debtor will begin the process of obtaining necessary sanctions, approvals, and licences as per the implementation schedule and the same is tabled below: -

Regulation 38 (3) (e): This Regulation deals with the capability of the Resolution Applicant to implement the resolution plan. It is submitted that M/s S.A. Enterprises is headed by Proprietor Mr Abdul Latheef Jabbar, an Indian national aged about 48 years. He has over 20 years of experience in the construction industry, and has executed various construction projects in Karnataka. The Proprietor is supported by a team of consultants who are specialised in legal, construction, sales, and administration matters. The team members of the SRA are mentioned at Annexure-2 of the Petition. The SRA shall also infuse through their network of investors, amounts up to Rs 10 Crores (Rupees Ten Crores only), which shall be mobilised through advance-sales of the Project LLP’s share of the saleable area in order to commence construction work on the Project. RA shall arrange to provide comfort-letters from the prospective identified investors in this regard and an Affidavit in this regard is enclosed in Annexure - 4. It is also submitted that projects undertaken by SRA along with their status is as follows:

The Resolution Plan dated 29.11.2022 (as further revised on 06.11.2024), submitted by M/s. S.A. Enterprises, is hereby approved.

The Resolution Plan so approved shall be binding on the Corporate Debtor and its employees, members, creditors, including the Central Government, State Government, or any local authority to whom a debt in respect of the payment of dues arising under any law for the time being in force such as authorities to whom statutory dues are owed, guarantors and other stakeholders involved in the Resolution Plan.

Further, the Resolution Professional is directed to handover the management, control and all the assets, documents/records in physical and/or digital form to the Resolution Applicant immediately and the Resolution Professional will stand discharged in this matter.

Moreover, it is clarified that this order should not be construed as an order granting exemption from payment of stamp duty, taxes or any charges, if any, payment is due or required in accordance with law or in respect to any permission/compliance with any other requirement which may be specifically required under any law for the time being in force.