COMMITTEE OF CREDITORS OF AMTEK AUTO LIMITED THROUGH CORPORATION BANK versus DINKAR T. VENKATSUBRAMANIAN AND OTHERS

Citation: [2021] 9 S.C.R. 740 · Decided: 01-12-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Disposed off
cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
740
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 9 S.C.R.
   [2021] 9 S.C.R. 740
740
COMMITTEE OF CREDITORS OF AMTEK AUTO LIMITED
THROUGH CORPORATION BANK
v.
DINKAR T. VENKATSUBRAMANIAN AND OTHERS
(Civil Appeal No. 6707 of 2019)
DECEMBER 01, 2021
[M. R. SHAH AND SANJIV KHANNA, JJ.]
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – s. 12 – Initiation
of insolvency resolution process – The respondent no.2-successful
resolution applicant defaulted in its obligation – Therefore
Adjudicating authority directed reconstitution of Committee of
Creditors (COC) of corporate debtor, for reconsideration of
Resolution Plan given by resolution applicant (Respondent no.3) –
Respondent no.3 was declared as ineligible applicant – Appellate
Authority ordered liquidation of corporate debtor – Appeal to
Supreme Court by COC – Liquidation proceedings were stayed –
As per direction of Supreme Court, in fresh resolution process
respondent no.3 was approved as successful resolution applicant –
However, respondent no.3 tried to withdraw the resolution plan –
Move of respondent no.3 to withdraw from resolution plan was
rejected by Supreme Court and the resolution plan of respondent
no.3 was approved by Adjudicating authority – Since respondent
no.3 did not act upon the resolution plan – COC filed contempt
petition and respondent no.3 filed application for rectification of
the order of Supreme Cour whereby the Court had rejected
application of respondent no.3 for withdrawal from the resolution
plan – Applications of COC as well as respondent no.3 were
dismissed – Held : As per s. 12 entire resolution process had to be
completed within the period stipulated therein – In view of multiple
proceedings the time limit has been condoned – In order to avoid
further delay, the parties concerned are directed to implement the
approved resolution plan.
Disposing of the appeal, the Court
HELD: The entire resolution process has to be completed
within the period stipulated under Section 12 of the Insolvency
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
741
and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and any deviation would defeat the
object and purpose of providing such time limit. However, by
earlier order, the time limit has been condoned in view of the
various litigations pending between the parties and in the peculiar
facts and circumstances of the case. Therefore, any further delay
in implementation of the approved resolution plan submitted by
the successful resolution applicant (Respondent no.3) Deccan
Value Investor (DVI) which as such has been approved by the
adjudicating authority in the month of July, 2020 and even the
appeal against the same has been dismissed subsequently, any
further delay would defeat the very object and purpose of
providing specific time limit for completion of the insolvency
resolution process, as mandated under Section 12 of the IBC.
Therefore, the concerned parties to the approved resolution plan
and/or connected with implementation of the approved resolution
plan including IMC ate directed to complete the implementation
of the approved resolution plan. It is further directed that on
implementation of the approved resolution plan and even as per
the approved resolution plan, an amount of Rs. 500 crores now
deposited by DVI-successful resolution applicant (Respondent
no.3) be transferred to the respective lenders/financial creditors
as per the approved resolution plan and/or as mutually agreed.
[Para 10][750-G-H; 751-A-D]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.6707
of 2019.
From the Judgment and Order dated 16.08.2019 of the National
Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in Company Appeal (AT)
(Insolvency) No.219 of 2019.
Tushar Mehta, SG, Anoop Rawat, Siddhant Kant, S. S. Shroff,
Advs. for the Appellant.
Parag Tripathi, Sr. Adv., Gyanendra Kumar, Ms. Shikha Tandon,
M/s Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, Mayank Pandey, E. C. Agrawala,
Sanjay Bhatt, Ms. Niharika Sharma, Anirudh Dvsaj, Rabin Majumdar,
Ms. Akansha Srivastava, Arvind Kumar Gupta, Ms. Shivani Sharma,
Ravindra Sadanand Chingale, P. S. Sudheer, Ms. Sonam Gupta, M/s
Corporate Legal Partners, Advs. for the Respondents.
COMMITTEE OF CREDITORS OF AMTEK AUTO LTD. THROUGH CORP.
BANK v. DINKAR T. VENKATSUBRAMANIAN
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
742
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 9 S.C.R.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
M. R. SHAH, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment
and order dated 16.08.2019 passed by the National Company Law
Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Appellate
A
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.