Case Law Details
S. Gopalakrishnan Vs Satish Damodar Akole & Anr. (NCLT Mumbai)
NCLT Mumbai held that resolution plan of Saturn Rings and Forgings Private Limited submitted by S. Gopalkrishnan meeting the requirements of Section 30(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) and Regulations 37, 38, 38 (1A) and 39 (4) of the Regulations is approved.
Facts- The Resolution Professional of Saturn Rings and Forgings Private Limited (“Corporate Debtor”), S. Gopalkrishnan, has filed an Application bearing seeking approval of Resolution Plan in terms of Sec. 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code”) after the approval of Committee of Creditors (“CoC”) of the Corporate Debtor.
Conclusion- In K Sashidhar v. Indian Overseas Bank & Others, the Hon’ble Apex Court held that if the CoC had approved the Resolution Plan by requisite percent of voting share, then as per section 30(6) of the Code, it is imperative for the Resolution Professional to submit the same to the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT). On receipt of such a proposal, the Adjudicating Authority is required to satisfy itself that the Resolution Plan as approved by CoC meets the requirements specified in Section 30(2).
Held that the instant Resolution Plan meets the requirements of Section 30(2) of the Code and Regulations 37, 38, 38 (1A) and 39 (4) of the Regulations. The Resolution Plan is not in contravention of any of the provisions of Section 29A of the Code and is in accordance with law. The same needs to be approved. Hence ordered.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
