- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
NCLAT Closes Insolvency Proceedings Against Mcleod Russel
NCLAT Closes Insolvency Proceedings Against Mcleod Russel
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Principal Bench, by its two-member coram comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has closed the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Mcleod Russel India, the Kolkata-based tea plantation company after the company and the financial creditors submitted before the Appellate Tribunal that the matter has been resolved between the two parties.
The insolvency application against the company was filed in the Kolkata Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) by IL&FS Infrastructure Debt Fund. The NCLT admitted the application on 10 February 2023.
Mcleod Russel had defaulted on the payment of Rs. 347 crores to IL&FS Infrastructure Debt Fund. The total default amounts include Rs. 252 crores as the principal amount and Rs. 95 crores as the interest accrued.
The NCLT had appointed Ritesh Prasad Adatiya as the interim resolution professional.
The interim resolution professional had started the process and had asked the creditors to submit their claims. Lenders had submitted claims of Rs. 3,300 crores. However, promoters of Mcleod Russel filed an appeal on 22 February against the NCLT order allowing the insolvency petition.
A Supplementary Affidavit was filed by the appellant- Aditya Khaitan- promoter and Chairman of the group whereby an agreement between the two parties dated 5 May 2023 was brought on record.
The financial creditors informed the Appellate Tribunal they already settled the matter with the promoter Khaitans and there are no issues between the parties. The financial creditors further submitted that in the event of default, liberty be given to revive the appeal.
Moreover, the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) had submitted that certain dues have yet not been paid.
On this counsel for the appellant submitted that, considerable amount of expenses has been paid and if any amount is unpaid, that shall be taken care of.
Thus, the NCLAT ordered, “In view the aforesaid, settlement agreement is taken on record, we close CIRP initiated by order dated 10.02.2023. Order dated 10.02.2023 is set aside.”
The bench accordingly, disposed the appeal.