Withdrawal of CIRP plea not allowed where purported plan was not a settlement simpliciter as envisaged u/s 12A

  • Blog|News|Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code|
  • 3 Min Read
  • By Taxmann
  • |
  • Last Updated on 1 October, 2021

Recent Posts

Blog, News, FEMA & Banking

Rs 10L Recovery Limit for DRT Filings Now Also Applies to Applications Between 26.09.2018 and 30.06.2019 | Finance Ministry

Blog, News, Company Law

SEBI Amends Alternative Investment Funds Regulations, 2012 | Introduces a New Regulation w.r.t ‘dissolution Period’

Latest from Taxmann

Withdrawal of application Corporate insolvency resolution process

Case Details: Siva Industries and Holdings Ltd., In re - [2021] 130 taxmann.com 440 (NCLT- Chennai)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

    • R. Sucharitha, Judicial Member and Anil Kumar B., Technical Member
    • Sanjeev Kumar, Anshul Sehgal, Advs., Arvindh Pandian, Sr. Adv., Avinash Krishnan Ravi, Adv., Satish Parasaran, Sr. Adv., Subhang P. Nair and M.L. Ganesh, Advs. for the Appearing Parties.

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) in case of the corporate debtor was admitted and Insolvency Resolution Professional (RP) was appointed. Initially, two resolutions plans were received, however, both of them were withdrawn.

After this, a third resolution plan was received which did not receive consent from the Committee of Creditors(CoC). Soon after, the promoter of the corporate debtor, although ineligible to submit a resolution plan tried to restructure loans under the pretext of a settlement proposal.

NCLT Held

However, the purported plan was not a settlement simpliciter as envisaged under section 12A, rather, it was a business restructuring plan. Further, as per the settlement Plan, there was no final offer made by the promoter of the corporate debtor and also no acceptance made by CoC in this regard.

Therefore, there being ambiguity of terms of settlement and no finality having been reached between the promoter of corporate debtor and CoC as per settlement proposal, order for withdrawal of CIRP could not have been passed.

Case Review

List of Cases Referred to

Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

«
»

Everything on Tax and Corporate Laws of India

To subscribe to our weekly newsletter please log in/register on Taxmann.com

Author: Taxmann

Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.

The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:

  • The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
  • All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
  • Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
  • Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
  • All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
  • The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
  • Font and size that's easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied