Ashok Bhushan#Jarat Kumar Jain#Alok Srivastava#30NL1500MiscellaneousMANUAshok Bhushan,TRIBUNALSAct#Adjudicating Authority#Admission#Against The Record#Appeal#Appellate Tribunal#Application#Application Under#Approval#Assessment#Assumption#Attempt#Authority#Bank#Bankruptcy#Bench#Board#Breach#Breach of Regulation#Business#Case#Challenge#Circulars#Claim#Claims#Commercial#Committee#Company#Concern#Consortium#Contravention#Contravention of#Cost#Creditor#Creditors#Date#Debt#Debtor#Decision#Due#Enactment#Enjoy#Error#Examination#Expert#Express#Finding#Going Concern#Grant#Ground#Ground of Challenge#History#India#Information#Insolvency#Interest#Intervention#Irregularity#Issue#Judgment#Judicial Intervention#Jurisdiction#Key#Legislative History#Liquidation#Mandatory#Mark#Material#Material Irregularity#Meeting#Member#Minutes#Modification#National#New#Notice#Offer#Opportunity#Order#Parties#Pass#Payment#Period#Person#Prescribed#Priority#Process#Processes#Protection#Publication#Publish#Receipt#Record#Recovery#Regulation#Regulations#Rejection#Representative#Resolution#Return#Revised Plan#Revision#Share#Shares#Sick Industrial Companies#State#Statement#Status#Time being in Force#Tribunal#Upward Revision#Value#Vote#Voting2021-12-24692421,692413,692446,692412,692415,27209,692388,692390,692391,692411 -->

MANU/NL/0602/2021

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 985 of 2021

Decided On: 21.12.2021

Appellants: Indian Potash Limited Vs. Respondent: Naresh Kumar Verma, RP for Corporate Debtor (Bohra Industries Limited) and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Ashok Bhushan, J. (Chairperson), Jarat Kumar Jain, J. (Member (J)) and Dr. Alok Srivastava

JUDGMENT

Ashok Bhushan, J. (Chairperson)

1. This Appeal has been filed by an Unsuccessful Resolution Applicant challenging the order of the Adjudicating Authority dated 13.10.2021 by which the Adjudicating Authority has approved the Resolution Plan of Respondent No. 3.

2. The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was initiated against Bohra Industries Limited - the Corporate Debtor, by order dated 9th August, 2019. After publication of Form-G on 21.10.2019 a Resolution Plan was submitted by the Appellant. In Committee of Creditors (CoC) meeting dated 10th June, 2020, the Appellant made a statement that it had given its best offer. The possibility of any upward revision in Appellant offer was declined. A resolution was passed authorizing Resolution Professional to publish a fresh Form-G, inviting Expression of Interest to submit Resolution Plan for Bohra Industries Limited. In the 9th CoC meeting, Resolution Professional requested that CoC may deliberate on Resolution Plan submitted by the Appellant as well as another Resolution Plan submitted by consortium of six individual. CoC decided to choose to discuss the Resolution Plan with Resolution Applicants separately. In the 10th CoC meeting held on 25th August, 2020, both the Resolution Applicants were asked to give their updated revised Resolution Plans on or before 2nd September, 2020. The representatives of CoC categorically asked to increase the amount offered in the respective Resolution Plans. In 11th, 12th and 13th COC meeting, both the Resolution Applicants were given opportunity to revise the Plan. Thirteenth COC meeting was held on 18th September, 2020 in which it was noted that both the Resolution Applicants have sent their final plan. On 19.09.2020, it was circulated to CoC. Fourteenth CoC meeting was held to take vote of CoC on the Resolution Plan. The CoC decided to approve the Resolution Plan submitted by consortium of six individuals, i.e. Respondent No. 3 and declared the same as approved with 100% voting and Resolution Plan submitted by the Appellant was rejected with 100% voting. Hence, an Application was filed before the Adjudicating Authority for approval of the Resolution Plan. The Adjudicating Authority by the impugned order dated 13.10.2021 has approved the Resolution Plan of Respondent No. 3. Aggrieved against which judgment this Appeal has been filed.

3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant challenging the o........