SBI (SAM Branch) Vs Vibha Agro Tech Limited (NCLT Hyderabad)
Material Facts
The applications were filed under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, read with Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules against the Corporate Debtor through its Resolution Professional. The applicants alleged that the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) failed to publish the public announcement in the manner prescribed under Regulation 6 of the IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) (Third Amendment) Regulations, 2026. They sought a stay of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), a declaration that the public announcement was illegal, issuance of a fresh public announcement in several States, and inclusion of their claims in the Information Memorandum.
The Corporate Debtor, engaged in production and supply of hybrid seeds, was admitted into CIRP on 5 June 2023. The IRP published Form-A on 14 June 2023 only in the Hyderabad editions of Economic Times (English) and Nava Telangana (Telugu). A Committee of Creditors (CoC) was constituted, the Resolution Professional was appointed, and the CoC approved a resolution plan submitted by Vasavi Realty Private Limited, which was awaiting approval by the Tribunal.
Procedural History
The applicants challenged the conduct of the CIRP, contending that the IRP failed to publish the public announcement at locations where the Corporate Debtor conducted material business operations, thereby preventing several operational creditors from submitting claims. The Resolution Professional opposed the applications, disputing the applicants’ locus standi and contending that Regulation 6 had been complied with.
