LexM/S JSW STEEL LIMITED versus PRATISHTHA THAKUR HARITWAL & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 3 S.C.R. 1200 : 2025 INSC 401 M/s JSW Steel Limited v. Pratishtha Thakur Haritwal & Ors. (Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 629 of 2023 In Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1177 of 2020) 27 March 2025 [B.R. Gavai* and Augustine George Masih, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether the case of the present Petitioner is specifically covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of Ghanshyam Mishra and Sons Private Limited v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited and Others [2021] 13 SCR 737; After the said judgment was brought to the notice of the respondents/authorities, whether the respondents/authorities could have proceeded with the recovery proceedings. Headnotes† Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 – s.2(b) – Insolvency proceedings were initiated against an erstwhile company – The petitioner-company was declared as the Successful Resolution Applicant – Resolution Plan was submitted – The NCLT approved the Resolution Plan – Pursuant thereto, the management of the erstwhile company was taken over by the petitioner company – Thereafter, various demand notices were raised upon the petitioner company for recovery of Sales Tax, Central Tax and Entry Tax – Petitioner- company contended that the act of the respondents in initiating proceedings for the dues which are not part of the Resolution Plan are on the face of it contemptuous in nature and in violation of the law laid down by this Court in the case of Ghanshyam Mishra – Correctness: Held: In view of clear pronouncement of law by this Court, all the dues of any of the stakeholders including the statutory dues owed to the Central Government, any State Government or any * Author [2025] 3 S.C.R. 1201 M/s JSW Steel Limited v. Pratishtha Thakur Haritwal & Ors. local authority, which were not part of the Resolution Plan, stood extinguished from the date on which the Resolution Plan stood approved – A successful resolution applicant cannot suddenly be faced with “undecided” claims after the resolution plan submitted by him has been accepted as this would amount to a hydra head popping up which would throw into uncertainty amounts payable by a prospective resolution applicant who would successfully take over the business of the corporate debtor – All claims must be submitted to and decided by the RP so that a prospective resolution applicant knows exactly what has to be paid in order that it may then take over and run the business of the corporate debtor – In the instant case, there is no hesitation in holding that the demands raised by the respondents/authorities for a period prior to the date on which the NCLT has approved the Resolution Plan were totally contemptuous in nature – The respondents could not have raised the said demands inasmuch as they are not part of the Resolution Plan – In spite of public notice, neither the State of Chhattisgarh nor its authorities raised any claim before the CoC – In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered view that the case of the present Petitioner is specifically covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of Ghanshyam Mishra, which judgment was brought to the notice of the respondents/authorities, the respondents/ authorities could not have proceeded with the recovery proceedings. [Paras 22, 24, 27, 33] Case Law Cited Ghanshyam Mishra and Sons Private Limited v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited and Others, Civil Appeal No. 8129 of 2019 decided on 13.04.2021 by the Supreme Court of India : 2021 INSC 250 : [2021] 13 SCR 737 – relied on. State Tax Officer v. Rainbow Papers Limited [2022] 13 SCR 808 : (2023) 9 SCC 545 – distinguished. Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Limited through Authorised Signatory v. Satish Kumar Gupta and Others [2019] 16 SCR 275 : (2020) 8 SCC 531; Innoventive Industries Ltd. v. ICICI Bank & Anr. [2017] 8 SCR 33 : (2018) 1 SCC 407; K. Shashidhar v. Indian Overseas Bank and Others [2019] 3 SCR 845 : (2019) 12 SCC 150; Maharashtra Seamless Limited v. Padmanabhan Venkatesh and Others [2020] 2 SCR 1157 : (2020) 11 SCC 467; Karad Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd. v. Swwapnil Bhingardevay & Ors. 1202 [2025] 3 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports [2020] 13 SCR 465 : (2020) 9 SCC 729; Kalpraj Dharamshi and Another v. Kotak Investment Advisors Limited and Another [2021] 2 SCR 677 : 2021 SCC OnLine SC 204; K.N. Rajakumar v. V. Nagarajan and Others (2022) 4 SCC 617; Ruchi Soya Industrie
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.