Sanjay Deshmukh vs S Gopalakrishnan & Anr.

24.07.2025: These two Appeals have been filed by the Suspended Director of the Corporate Debtor challenging the order dated 27.05.2025 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Mumbai Bench Court II, in IA (IBC) Plan/33/2025 as well as subsequent order dated 03.07.2025 passed in IA (I.B.C) (Plan) No.33/MB/2025.

Brief facts necessary to be noticed for deciding both the Appeals are:

In the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process of the Corporate Debtor-“M/s. Daulat Agro (India) Private Limited”, the Resolution Plan submitted by the Appellant as well as M/s. Amrit Fresh Private Limited. Appellant being a Suspended Director of an MSME being eligible to participate has also given a Resolution Plan and both the Resolution Plan of Appellant and M/s. Amrit Fresh Private Limited came for consideration before the Committee of Creditors (CoC). CoC, after considering both the plans, approved the plan of M/s. Amrit Fresh Private Limited on 15.01.2025. Appellant’s plan has value of Rs.5.75 Crores whereas plan which was submitted by M/s. Amrit Fresh Private Limited was valued at Rs.10.43 Crores. The Resolution Professional, after approval of the plan by CoC, filed a plan approval application being 33 of 2025 which came for consideration before the Adjudicating Authority. Appellant submitted before the Court that Appellant is ready to offer a higher value of more than 30%. The Adjudicating Authority considering the offer of the Appellant directed the Appellant to deposit the amount of Rs.2 Crore within seven days so that the direction may be issued to consider the revised plan of the Appellant afresh. Appellant however, could not deposit the amount of Rs.2 Crore and deposited only Rs.75 lakhs. Adjudicating Authority, after noticing this, on 27.05.2025 noticing that Appellant has failed to comply the direction of depositing Rs.2 Crore, hence, opportunity granted to the promoter was rejected and directed for further hearing. Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.947 of 2025 has been filed challenging the order dated 27.05.2025. Subsequently, after hearing the parties, Adjudicating Authority by the impugned order dated 03.07.2025 has approved the plan against which order Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1081 of 2025 is filed.

Learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Appellant is still ready to deposit Rs.2 Crores and there was only short delay in not depositing the amount. Appellant is ready to offer higher amount to Rs.10.43. Crores, hence, maximization of the value Adjudicating Authority ought to have considered the plan of the Appellant.

Counsel for the Respondents refuting the submission of the Counsel for the Appellant submits that the CoC has not agreed to consider the revised offer of the Appellant. It is submitted that it was already communicated to the Appellant that his revised offer cannot be considered.

We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the record.

From the facts, it is clear that the plan of the Appellant as well as M/s. Amrit Fresh Private Limited was considered and CoC approved the plan of M/s. Amrit Fresh Private Limited which had plan value of Rs.10.43 Crores and Appellant had initially given a value of only Rs.5.75 Crores. It was at the stage of consideration of the approval of the plan, Appellant appeared and prayed that he is offering higher value on which opportunity was granted by the Adjudicating Authority to deposit Rs.2 Crores to show his bonafide in which he failed. We do not find any error in the order of the Adjudicating Authority dated 27.05.2025 holding that Appellant having not deposited the amount, opportunity granted is rejected and decided to proceed further. In the plan approval order, Adjudicating Authority has considered all aspects and found the plan in accordance with Section 30(4) and has approved the plan. We do not find any error in the order of the Adjudicating Authority approving the plan submitted by the Successful Resolution Applicant.

In the present case, we do not find any ground to interfere with the orders dated 27.05.2025 and 03.07.2025. Both the Appeals are dismissed.