National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
Parthiv Parik RP of Jaihind Project Ltd vs Brahmaputra Crackers & Polymer Ltd on 12 June 2020
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
NEW DELHI
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 509 of 2020
IN THE MATTER OF:
Parthiv Parikh,
RP of Jaihind Project Ltd.
…Appellant
Versus
Brahmaputra Cracker & Polymer Ltd.
…Respondent
Present:
For Appellant :
Ms. Purti Marwaha, Ms. Henna George and Ms. Tush, Advocates For Respondent :
Mr. Akshat Khare, Advocate
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
(Through Virtual Mode)
12.06.2020 Ms. Purti Marwaha, learned counsel for Appellant filed a copy of the order dated 19th March, 2020 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad Court II by way of an additional affidavit, which is taken on record.
On perusal of this order, we find that the ‘resolution plan’ of Parixit Irrigation Limited qua Jaihind Projects Limited has been approved. In view of the approval of the resolution plan of, the resolution applicant, the earlier order passed by the Adjudicating Authority on 22nd January, 2020 in I.A. No. 657 of 2019 in CP (IB) No. 172/NCLT/AHM/2018 as regards the direction given to the ‘Resolution Professional’ to include the claim of the Applicant – ‘Brahmputra Cracker & Polymer Limited’ at full value so as to enable prospective resolution applicants to design their resolution plans accordingly, stands overtaken by the subsequent event viz. approval of the resolution plan on 19th March, 2020 which
- 2 - is supposed to balance the interests of all stakeholders. This appeal does not question the legality or correctness of the approved resolution plan. Viewed in this context appeal against the impugned order passed prior to approval of ‘resolution plan’ by the Adjudicating Authority in regard to the inclusion or admission of a claim would no more survive for consideration.
The appeal is accordingly disposed of as being not maintainable.
[ Justice Bansi Lal Bhat ] Acting Chairperson
[ Justice Anant Bijay Singh ] Member (Judicial)
[ Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra ] Member (Technical)
/ns/RR/
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 509 of 2020