- JSW Steel Ltd. Vs. Mahender Kumar Khandelwal & Ors.-NCLAT
In the CIRP of Bhushan Power & Steel Limited- (Corporate Debtor), the Resolution Plan submitted by JSW Steel Limited (Resolution Applicant) has been approved by the Adjudicating Authority by impugned Judgment dated 5th September, 2019 with certain conditions. After the approval of plan when Monitoring Committee was monitoring the change of management, on 10th October, 2019, the Directorate of Enforcement of Central Government attached assets of Bhushan Power & Steel Limited- (Corporate Debtor) under Section 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. JSW Steel Limited is Successful Resolution Applicant, in its appeal has sought for setting aside/ modification of conditions imposed in paragraph 128 sub paras (e), (f), (g), (i), (j), (k) of the impugned order dated 5th September, 2019.
Easily search and access all NCLT / NCLAT and IBBI related orders in your Apple iOS / Google Android smartphones. Available for free trial period of 15 days. Click Here to download
NCLAT view that stand taken by the Directorate of Enforcement cannot be accepted, in absence of any mandate under Section 32A that the Successful Resolution Applicant after approval of the plan is required to give any such declaration as to whether the benefit of Section 32A will be applicable to them or not. Only the competent authority can decide such issue if any such allegation is levelled.
Section 32A provides that Corporate Debtor shall not be prosecuted for an offence committed prior to commencement of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) once Resolution Plan has been approved by Adjudicating Authority (AA)
- Jair Prakash Associates vs IDBI Bank Ltd
The Court in this case dealt with two issues hereunder: a. Whether a resolution applicant whose plan has been rejected by CoC can again submit a revised plan after the statutory period provided for in the Code. b. Whether NCLT/NCLAT have the inherent power to exclude any period from the statutory period of CIRP provided under the Code.
The court clarified that the order made by it in such an exceptional case shall not tantamount to a precedent. In the instant case, the majority of stakeholders were home buyers. It permitted the interim resolution professional to send requests to submit revised resolution plans as per Regulation 36B (7) of the Code. Further, it exercised its power under Article 142 of the Constitution and extended the time by 90 days for completion of the proceedings instead of the amendment Act, 2019 coming into force. It did not touch the issue related to the power of NCLT/NCLAT to exclude any time period from statutory time period
