All claims which weren’t part of RP would stand extinguished on approval of the plan: NCLAT
- Blog|News|Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code|
- 2 Min Read
- By Taxmann
- |
- Last Updated on 21 March, 2023
Case Details: R.S Wire Industries v. Trans-Fab Power India (P.) Ltd. - [2023] 147 taxmann.com 555 (NCLAT-New Delhi)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
-
- Anant Bijay Singh, Judicial Member & Ms Shreesha Merla, Technical Member
- Ms. Pratiksha Sharma, Kunal Kanungo, Atishay Jain & Ankit Acharya, Advs. for the Appellant.
- Saahil Memon & Pramod Nanasabheb Patil for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
In the instant case, the CIRP was initiated u/s 9 of the IBC against the respondent no. 1 (i.e. the corporate debtor). The appellant filed its claim before the Resolution Professional. However, the Resolution Professional rejected the said claim. Aggrieved by aforesaid rejection, the appellant filed an application before the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT).
The NCLT dismissed the said application observing that during pendency of the said application, a resolution plan was approved and in view of the same, nothing survived in that application. Thereafter, an appeal was made to the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) against the order passed by the NCLT.
NCLAT Held
The NCLAT observed that since the resolution plan was duly approved by the NCLT u/s 31 of the IBC, claims as provided in the resolution plan should stand frozen and would be binded on the corporate debtor.
The NCLAT held that on the date of approval of the resolution plan by the NCLT, all such claims which were not part of the resolution plan should stand extinguished. Further, no person would be entitled to initiate or continue any proceedings in respect of a claim, which was not part of the resolution plan. Therefore, the NCLT had rightly dismissed the application filed by the appellant.
List of Cases Reviewed
-
- Order of NCLT – Mumbai in I.A. 417/2021, I.A. 424/2021, I.A. 578/2021, I.A. 896/2021, I.A. 899/2021 & I.A 902/2021 in CP (IB) 3641/MB/2018, 7-7-2021 (para 10) affirmed.
- Ghanashyam Mishra & Sons (P.) Ltd. v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. [2021] 126 taxmann.com 132/166 SCL 237 (SC) (para 9) followed.
List of Cases Referred to
-
- Ghanashyam Mishra & Sons (P.) Ltd. v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. [2021] 126 taxmann.com 132/166 SCL 237 (SC) (para 4).
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.
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