NCLAT Dismisses Resolution Applicant's Appeals Challenging Rejection of Plan in CIRP of Jabalpur MSW Pvt. Ltd. — No Merit Found in Allegations of Non-Communication or Procedural Irregularity.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: CHENNAI
  • 29
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involves two appeals filed by Sagar Stone Industries, the Resolution Applicant, challenging an order dated 21.02.2025 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) in I.A. No.4977/ND/2024 and I.A. No.5769/ND/2024. The Corporate Debtor was Jabalpur MSW Pvt. Ltd., undergoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The Committee of Creditors (CoC) considered ten resolution plans, including that of the Appellant, and on 11.06.2024 approved the plan of the Successful Resolution Applicant (SRA) with 100% vote share. The Resolution Professional filed an application (I.A. No.36/2024) for approval of the plan, which was reserved for orders. The Appellant filed two applications: I.A. No.4977/ND/2024 seeking rejection of the approval of the Resolution Plan, and I.A. No.5769/ND/2024 seeking a direction to IBBI to initiate an enquiry against the Resolution Professional. Both were rejected by the impugned order. The Appellant contended that he was never informed about the rejection of his plan and that the CoC extended time for consideration without resorting to challenge process. The Resolution Professional submitted that the Appellant was communicated about the decision on 15.06.2024 and had even congratulated the SRA via email. The NCLAT found no merit in the appeals and dismissed them.

Headnote

A) Insolvency Law - Resolution Plan Approval - Communication of Rejection - The unsuccessful resolution applicant challenged the rejection of his plan and approval of another plan, alleging non-communication. The NCLAT held that the appellant was communicated about the decision on 15.06.2024 and had even congratulated the successful resolution applicant via email, thus no merit in the appeal. (Paras 2-4)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Adjudicating Authority erred in rejecting the Appellant's applications seeking rejection of the approved resolution plan and direction for enquiry against the Resolution Professional.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Both appeals are dismissed. No order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Resolution plan approval by CoC
  • communication of rejection to unsuccessful resolution applicant
  • scope of interference by appellate tribunal
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2024 LawText (NCLAT) (01) 118

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 524 of 2025 and Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 525 of 2025

2025-03-28

Mr. Vinod Chaurasia, Advocate for RP

Sagar Stone Industries

Sajjan Kumar Dokania & Ors. (in Appeal 524) and Sajjan Kumar Dokania (RP) (in Appeal 525)

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeals against rejection of applications challenging approval of resolution plan and seeking enquiry against Resolution Professional.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought setting aside of the impugned order and rejection of the approved resolution plan, and direction to IBBI to initiate enquiry against the Resolution Professional.

Filing Reason

Appellant's resolution plan was rejected by CoC and another plan was approved; Appellant alleged non-communication and procedural irregularities.

Previous Decisions

Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) rejected I.A. No.4977/ND/2024 and I.A. No.5769/ND/2024 vide order dated 21.02.2025.

Issues

Whether the Appellant was not informed about the rejection of his resolution plan? Whether the CoC extended time for consideration without resorting to challenge process?

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant: Never informed about rejection of his plan and approval of SRA's plan; CoC extended time for consideration without challenge process. Respondent (RP): Appellant was communicated on 15.06.2024 and even congratulated the SRA via email.

Ratio Decidendi

The Appellant was communicated about the rejection of his plan and had congratulated the SRA, thus no merit in the appeals.

Judgment Excerpts

Learned counsel for the Resolution Professional submits that the Appellant was communicated about the decision on 15.06.2024 and was also informed about the email of the SRA. Learned counsel for the Resolution Professional submits that Appellant has also congratulated the SRA via email.

Procedural History

The Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) rejected I.A. No.4977/ND/2024 and I.A. No.5769/ND/2024 on 21.02.2025. The Appellant filed two appeals before NCLAT on 28.03.2025.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Tribunals NCLAT Dismisses Resolution Applicant's Appeals Challenging Rejection of Plan in CIRP of Jabalpur MSW Pvt. Ltd. — No Merit Found in Allegations of Non-Communication or Procedural Irregularity.
Related Judgement
Tribunals NCLAT Dismisses Appeal by Suspended Director Against Admission of Section 9 Petition for Manpower Supply Services. Operational Creditor's claim upheld as debt and default were established, and no pre-existing dispute existed.