Neel Metal Products Ltd. Vs. CA Nirav Tarkas & Anr. - It is well settled that maximum period for CIRP is 330 days but in exceptional cases the extension can be granted even beyond 330 days.

 NCLAT (28.07.2022) in Neel Metal Products Ltd. Vs. CA Nirav Tarkas & Anr. [Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 887 of 2022] held that;

• CoC in its commercial wisdom decided and resolved to call for fresh bids and after deliberation resolved for seeking extension of 60 days. The said decision to invite fresh bids was taken with 100% voting shares of the CoC. 

• The CoC in its commercial wisdom has taken decision to call for fresh bids for which purpose 60 days’ extension has been granted. 

• We are of the view that in exercise of our appellate jurisdiction, no grounds have been made out to interfere with the decision taken by the Adjudicating Authority granting 60 days. 

• It is well settled that maximum period for CIRP is 330 days but in exceptional cases the extension can be granted even beyond 330 days. 

Excerpts of the order;

28.07.2022: Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant.

 

# 2. This Appeal has been filed against the order dared 21.06.2022 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Ahmedabad Bench, Court-2, by which Adjudicating Authority has allowed I.A 467 of 2022 filed by the Resolution Professional seeking further extension of 60 days of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) after expiry of 330 days.

 

# 3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Appellant is one of the Prospective Resolution Applicants and there were five plans before the Committee of Creditors (CoC) on which voting was also commenced. At that stage, CoC decided to call for fresh bids and requested for extension of time. It is submitted that there was no ground in the present case for extension of 60 days’ time when 330 days have already expired. It is submitted that the present is not a case of an extraordinary situation where any exception can be taken to 330 days’ limit. He submits that the procedure adopted by the CoC is only to get plan back door.

 

# 4. We have considered the submissions of the Counsel for the Appellant and perused the record.

 

# 5. The Adjudicating Authority in the order has observed that in the 15th meeting of the CoC held on 17.05.2022, CoC in its commercial wisdom decided and resolved to call for fresh bids and after deliberation resolved for seeking extension of 60 days. The said decision to invite fresh bids was taken with 100% voting shares of the CoC. The CoC in its commercial wisdom has taken decision to call for fresh bids for which purpose 60 days’ extension has been granted. We are of the view that in exercise of our appellate jurisdiction, no grounds have been made out to interfere with the decision taken by the Adjudicating Authority granting 60 days. It is well settled that maximum period for CIRP is 330 days but in exceptional cases the extension can be granted even beyond 330 days. Present is a case where revised plans have been invited in commercial wisdom of CoC. Hence, we do not find any error in the order to entertain this Appeal.

 

# 6. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that CoC has issued fresh Form-G inviting fresh plans after 330 days. We are of the view that the CoC has been taken decision in its commercial wisdom which does not warrant any interference.

The Appeal is dismissed.

 

----------------------------------------------