INDIA RESURGENCE ARC PRIVATE LIMITED versus M/S. AMIT METALIKS LIMITED & ANR.

INDIA RESURGENCE ARC PRIVATE LIMITED versus M/S. AMIT METALIKS LIMITED & ANR.

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding that (a) approval of a resolution plan is a commercial decision of the Committee of Creditors and judicial review is limited to checking compliance with mandatory requirements in Section 30(2) (and Section 61(3) on appeal); (b) the amendment to Section 30(4) merely amplifies considerations for the CoC and does not entitle a dissenting secured creditor to enforce the entire security interest or receive more than the entitlement applicable to similarly situated secured creditors; and (c) the approved plan treated secured financial creditors, including the appellant, equitably and thus required no interference.

Parties
Appellant: India Resurgence ARC Private Limited; Respondent (resolution Applicant): M/s. Amit Metaliks Limited; Respondent (corporate Debtor): VSP Udyog Private Limited
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
13 May 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Under Section 62 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 / Final Judgment of the Supreme Court Dismissing the Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Resolution Plan Approval, Committee of Creditors Commercial Wisdom, Dissenting Financial Creditor Rights, Security Interest Valuation, Fair and Equitable Treatment, Interpretation of Section 30(2)(b) and Section 30(4)
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process Commercial Law Judicial Review Resolution Plan Approval Committee of Creditors Commercial Wisdom Dissenting Financial Creditor Rights Security Interest Valuation +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

India Resurgence ARC Private Limited

Appellant

M/s. Amit Metaliks Limited

Respondent (resolution Applicant)

VSP Udyog Private Limited

Respondent (corporate Debtor)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Under Section 62 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 / Final Judgment of the Supreme Court Dismissing the Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Committee of Creditors was required to consider the priority and value of the security interest of the appellant under the amended Section 30(4) while approving the resolution plan
  2. 2 Extent of judicial review of CoC's commercial wisdom by the Adjudicating Authority and the Appellate Authority (Sections 30(2) and 61(3))
  3. 3 Entitlement of a dissenting secured financial creditor to enforce security interest or receive payment beyond the proportion provided to similarly situated secured financial creditors

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding that (a) approval of a resolution plan is a commercial decision of the Committee of Creditors and judicial review is limited to checking compliance with mandatory requirements in Section 30(2) (and Section 61(3) on appeal); (b) the amendment to Section 30(4) merely amplifies considerations for the CoC and does not entitle a dissenting secured creditor to enforce the entire security interest or receive more than the entitlement applicable to similarly situated secured creditors; and (c) the approved plan treated secured financial creditors, including the appellant, equitably and thus required no interference.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Orders of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal dated 02.03.2021 and the National Company Law Tribunal dated 20.10.2020 approving the resolution plan are affirmed