Tuesday 23 April 2024

Kalyan Toll Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Navin Khandelwal, Liquidator - The Appellant being Successful Bidder in the Liquidation Proceeding, reliefs and concessions as permissible under the liquidation process document and the Regulation are only admissible.

 NCLAT (2024.04.12) in Kalyan Toll Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Navin Khandelwal, Liquidator  [(2024) ibclaw.in 235 NCLAT, Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.600 of 2024] held that;

  • The Appellant being Successful Bidder in the Liquidation Proceeding, reliefs and concessions as permissible under the liquidation process document and the Regulation are only admissible.


Excerpts of the order;

12.04.2024: Heard Mr. Pratik Tripathi appearing for the Appellant. This Appeal has been filed against impugned order dated 25.01.2024 passed by the Adjudicating Authority by which order the application filed by the Successful Bidder in the liquidation proceeding of the Corporate Debtor seeking various reliefs and concessions has been decided. The Adjudicating Authority vide Para 6.1 of the order has granted reliefs and concessions to the extent as indicated. 


2. Appellant challenging the order contends that the Adjudicating Authority failed to grant necessary concession with regard to listing of company whereas the company is a listed company. The Adjudicating Authority by the impugned order has allowed the reliefs and concessions which according to the Adjudicating Authority was necessary for the Successful Purchaser in the liquidation proceeding. The Appellant referring to the Liquidation Regulation submits that acquisition plan under liquidation is akin to resolution plan under the CIRP and said benefits should also be allowed to the Appellant. 


3. The Appellant being Successful Bidder in the Liquidation Proceeding, reliefs and concessions as permissible under the liquidation process document and the Regulation are only admissible and the Adjudicating Authority has granted the reliefs and concessions which was necessary for the Appellant to carry on the business. We see no reason to interfere with the order impugned. Appeal is dismissed.


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


No comments:

Post a Comment

Disclaimer:

The sole purpose of this post is to create awareness on the "IBC - Case Law" and to provide synopsis of the concerned case law, must not be used as a guide for taking or recommending any action or decision. A reader must refer to the full citation of the order & do one's own research and seek professional advice if he intends to take any action or decision in the matters covered in this post.

Mr. Vijendra Kumar Jain Vs Mr. Nitin Ramchandra Jadhav and Ors.. - Thus, by taking a cue from the judgments rendered by the English Courts in this regard, the following acts have been held to constitute ‘Wrongful Trading’;

NCLT Mumbai-V (2024.05.07) in Mr. Vijendra Kumar Jain Vs Mr. Nitin Ramchandra Jadhav and Ors..[ (2024) ibclaw.in 515 NCLT, I.A. 677 of 2023...