NCLT Chandigarh Bench approves the Resolution Plan submitted by Deccan Value Investors LP and DVI PE Mauritius Limited

NCLT Chandigarh Bench approves the Resolution Plan submitted by Deccan Value Investors LP and DVI PE Mauritius Limited

Due to the peculiar circumstances of the case and keeping in view the interest of the corporate debtor and other stakeholders, it was directed that the Resolution Applicant submits the balance Performance Bank Guarantee within 15 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order

In this matter, the National Company Law Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench has approved the Resolution Plan, as approved by the Committee of Creditors and submitted by Deccan Value Investors LP and DVI PE Mauritius Limited-Resolution Applicants.

The State Bank of India, a Financial Creditor, filed the Company Petition (CP) under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code) read with Rule 4 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules 2016 (2016 Rules) for initiating the Insolvency Resolution Process against Castex Technologies Limited (Corporate Debtor/CTL). This Adjudicating Authority admitted the CP and accordingly Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process was initiated against CTL. The Committee of Creditors in its meeting had approved the Resolution Plan of Liberty House Group (LHG).

The Resolution Professional had filed the present CA under Section 30(6) and Section 31(1) and Section 60(5) of the Code, read with Regulation 39(4) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016, for approval of the Resolution Plan of DVI before this Adjudicating Authority.

Herein, the plan submitted by Deccan Value Investors LP and DVI PE (Mauritius) Limited (DVI) was declared H1 and the same were thoroughly negotiated and analyzed by the COC in the 32nd, 33rd, 34th and 35th meetings.

The Tribunal has opined that the resolution plan fulfilled all the requirements of Regulation 38 and 39 of the CIRP Regulations. A perusal of Regulation 38 would clearly show that by virtue of mandatory contents of resolution plan in relation to Section 30 and Section 31 of the Code, the requirement of Regulation 38 also stands fulfilled.

Even the requirement of Regulation 39 had been satisfied, as the RP submitted that the resolution plan of the Resolution applicant, as approved by the Committee of Creditors, to this Tribunal along with the compliance certificate in Form H, as per the requirements of Regulation 39(4) of the CIRP Regulations met all the requirements of the Code and the CIRP Regulations and that the resolution plan has been duly approved by the Committee of Creditors.

It was also observed that a perusal of the various clauses of the RFRP and the provisions of the Code i.e. Section 31 read with Section 30(2)(f) and Regulation 36B (4A) read with 39(4) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process) Regulations, 2016, clearly mandates that after declaring a party as a successful resolution applicant, the Committee of Creditors was required to issue the LOI and that the successful Resolution Applicant was required to execute the same and is required to submit the full Performance Bank Guarantee before the Resolution Professional files an application under Section 30(6) read with Section 31(1) of the Code.

However, in view of the peculiar circumstances of the case and keeping in view the interest of the corporate debtor and other stakeholders and the object of the Code, instead of returning the plan to the Committee of Creditors on the ground of non-furnishing of the full Performance Bank Guarantee by the Resolution Applicant, it was directed that the Resolution Applicant submits the balance Performance Bank Guarantee within 15 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

The resolution applicants confirmed that they are not disqualified under Section 29A of the Code to submit a resolution plan or under any other law applicable, which further showed that the resolution plan conformed to the provisions of the law for the time being in force and did not contravene any such provision.