27th December, 2024 Approval of Resolution Plan - Taxus Infrastructure And Power Projects Private Limited [IA-45-2024, IA-4818-2023 in IB-360-ND-2021] (9.81 MB)

IA-45/2024 and IA-4818/2023 in CP(IB)-360/ND/2021 Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency Ltd. vs. M/s Taxus Infrastructure & Power Projects Pvt. Ltd.
Page 1 of 83 IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI BENCH (COURT – II) Item No. 205 IB-360/ND/2021 IA-45/2024, IA-4818/2023

IN THE MATTER OF:

Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency Ltd.
… Applicant/ Financial Creditor
Versus M/s Taxus Infrastructure & Power Projects Pvt. Ltd. … Respondent/ Corporate Debtor

AND IN THE MATTER OF IA-45/2024:

(Under Section: 30(6) of IBC, 2016)

Darshan Singh Anand
(Resolution Professional) 310, New Delhi House,
3rd Floor, 27, Barakhamba Road,
Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001

    … Applicant 

Versus Satyen Sharma
(Director) Unit No. 102, Vardhman Centre,
Plot No. 3, First Floor, BH Block,
LSC, Shalimar Bagh West, Delhi-110088

 … Respondent No.1 

Puneet Singh Rana (Director) Unit No. 102, Vardhman Centre,
Plot No. 3, First Floor, BH Block,
LSC, Shalimar Bagh West, Delhi-110088

 … Respondent No.2 

Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency Ltd.
Indian Habitat Centre Complex, 1st Floor Core-4A, East Court,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003

 … Respondent No.3 

Waaree Energies Limited
602, Western Edge I, Western Express Highway,
Borivali (East), Mumbai, Maharashtra-400066

 … Respondent No.4 

Under Section: 7 of IBC, 2016

Page 2 of 83 Order delivered on 12.12.2024 CORAM:

SH. ASHOK KUMAR BHARDWAJ, HON’BLE MEMBER (J)
SH. SUBRATA KUMAR DASH, HON’BLE MEMBER (T)

PRESENT:

For the RP
: Adv. R.K. Srivastava, Adv. Himrit Singh Wadhwa For the SRA : Adv. Abhishek Anand, Adv. Karan Kohli. Adv. Yashasvi B.

               Hearing Through: VC and Physical (Hybrid) Mode 

ORAL ORDER

IA-45/2024: Present application has been preferred by Resolution Professional in terms of the provisions of Section 30(6) of IBC, 2016. The application preferred under Section 7 of IBC, 2016 by Indian Renewable Energy Development was admitted in terms of the order dated 10.10.2022 and CIRP was ordered to be commenced qua the Corporate Debtor. The various steps taken by Insolvency Resolution Professional pursuant to said order are enumerated in Para 8 to 12 of the application which reads thus: -

Page 3 of 83

Page 4 of 83 2. Para-13 of the application indicates that the Committee of Creditors was constituted on 31.10.2022. The relevant excerpt of the para reads thus: -

Page 5 of 83 3. The subsequent steps taken by the Resolution Professional and the CoC are enumerated in para 14 to 18 of the application. The relevant excerpt of the para reads thus: -

Page 6 of 83

As can be seen from para- 19 of the application, by 24.12.2022 i.e. last date of receipt of expression of interest, response was received from four parties (prospective Resolution Applicants). The para 19 reads thus: -

Page 7 of 83

We see from para 20 of the application, that with reference to the material available on record, the Resolution Professional was satisfied that all the PRAs were ex-facie meeting the requirement of Section 29(a) of the Code. The further steps taken in the matter are enumerated in para-21 to 30 of the application which reads thus: -

Page 8 of 83

Page 9 of 83

Page 10 of 83

As can be seen from para-30 (ibid) the CoC did not approve any of the plans, as they were not satisfied with the offer made by the SRAs. 7. In any case the CoC passed the resolution with 100% vote share that fresh Form-G should be published to invite expression of interest. As can be seen from para-32 of the application, fresh Form-G was published in four newspapers and the previous RFRP was also modified by the CoC. As the fresh process was expected to consume some more time, the extension of the CIRP process was sought from this Adjudicating Authority which was allowed. After receipt of fresh expression of interest and the plans the CoC approved the plan submitted by the present SRA by 76.50% vote shore. The progress in the matter from time to time

Page 11 of 83 has been noted in para-31 to 80 of the application preferred under Section 30(6) of IBC, 2016. The paras 31-80 of the application reads thus: -

Page 12 of 83

Page 13 of 83

Page 14 of 83

Page 15 of 83

Page 16 of 83

Page 17 of 83

Page 18 of 83

Page 19 of 83

Page 20 of 83

Page 21 of 83

Page 22 of 83

Page 23 of 83

Page 24 of 83

Page 25 of 83

Page 26 of 83

Page 27 of 83

Page 28 of 83

Page 29 of 83

Page 30 of 83

Page 31 of 83

Page 32 of 83

Page 33 of 83

Page 34 of 83

Page 35 of 83

Page 36 of 83

Page 37 of 83

Page 38 of 83

Page 39 of 83

Page 40 of 83

Page 41 of 83

Page 42 of 83

Page 43 of 83

As regard to para 63 of the application reproduced hereinabove, whereby it has been stated that the appeal filed by IREDA against the order dated 29.05.2024 passed by this Tribunal is pending before the Hon’ble NCLAT in Company Appeal (AT)(Ins) No. 1380 of 2024, it is noted that said appeal was dismissed vide judgment dated 06.12.2024. In the wake, the order passed by this Tribunal of admitting the claim of Waaree Energies Limited as a financial creditor stood upheld by the Hon’ble Appellate Tribunal. 9. As has been mentioned in the application (ibid) in terms of the order dated 29.05.2024 this Tribunal directed for reconstitution of CoC, as the applicant in IA-2086/2023 questioned the decision of Resolution Professional not admitting his claim as Financial Creditor. Para- 10 to 12 of the order reads thus: - “10. In exercise of its Summary jurisdiction, this Tribunal is not expected to conduct extensive trials and determine the disputed question . The broad scope of jurisdiction is to see whether the claim is based on authentic

Page 44 of 83 record/document or not. In the present case, the Arbitral Award dated 31.12.2021 is placed on record and is not disputed. In this context, a reference has been made Regulation 8(2)(b)(iv) of the IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons), 2016. ” “8. Claims by financial creditors
(2) The existence of debt due to the financial creditor may be proved on the basis of -
(b) the records available with an information utility, if any; or other relevant documents, including -
(iv) an order of a court or tribunal that has adjudicated upon the non-payment of a debt, if any.”
“11. Thus, in the present case, when there is an Arbitral Award in favour of the Applicant, its claims should not have been rejected by the Resolution Professional.” “12. In the result, the prayer is allowed and the Resolution Professional is directed to consider the claim made by the applicant as a Financial Debt and also to call the meeting of the CoC within 7 days of this order for passing appropriate resolution to that effect. The Applicant is allowed to participate in all the future CoC meetings with all rights provided under IBC. The IA is disposed of accordingly.” 10. In compliance with the aforementioned order, the CoC was reconstituted on 01.06.2024. During the course of hearing, we asked the Counsel for the Resolution Professional to indicate the satisfaction of requirement of Section 30(2) of IBC, 2016 and other relevant regulations on the subject. There is no dissenting Financial Creditor. As far as Operational Creditors are concerned, as can be seen from the resolution plans, the Operational Creditors are offered 0.04% of their claim. The claim of the workmen is nil and similarly statutory and government dues are also nil. Though there were statutory claims, but the RP did not admit the same as they were received after the initiation of CIRP. Furthermore, there is no application pending before us, questioning the decision

Page 45 of 83 of not admitting the statutory claims. No other application to oppose the plan and for objection thereto is filed. 11. The employees are offered 100% payment qua their admitted claim. The summary of claims and that of financial proposal reads thus: -

Page 46 of 83

Page 47 of 83

Page 48 of 83 12. The secured Financial Creditor i.e. IREDA is offered Rs. 21 Cr. against its admitted claim of Rs. 69,83,70,832/-. The unsecured Financial Creditor i.e. Waaree Energies Limited is offered Rs. 21,45,425/- against its admitted claim of Rs. 21,45,42,466/-. The Distribution offered in terms of the updated plan after addendum dated 19.07.2024 reads thus: -

Page 49 of 83

The plan also provides for payment of CIRP cost and other dues as per Section 30(2)(a) and (b) of the Code. The relevant excerpt of the plan in this regard reads thus: -

Page 50 of 83

Page 51 of 83

Page 52 of 83

The steps regarding implementation of the plan as contained therein reads thus: -

Page 53 of 83

The plan also contains the provisions for Monitoring Committee which reads thus: -

Page 54 of 83

Page 55 of 83

From the aforementioned it is clear that the requirements of Section 30(2)(a) to (d) are satisfied. The plan also indicates that the same is not contrary to any provisions of law. The part XIII of the plan where in the mandatory contents of the same are indicated reads thus: -

Page 56 of 83

Page 57 of 83

Page 58 of 83

Page 59 of 83

Page 60 of 83

Page 61 of 83

As can be seen from the remark against Section 30(2)(a)(ibid), the RA has declared that the plan does not contravene any provision of law. It is also noted that in Clause XVII of the plan, the SRA has specifically declared that the same is not in contravention to the provisions of the application. The clause reads thus: - “XVII.DECLARATION TO THE EFFECT THAT THE PLAN IS NOT IN CONTRAVENTION OF PROVISIONS OF THE APPLICABLE LAW The Resolution Applicant hereby confirms that this Resolution Plan is not in contravention of the provisions of any Applicable Law. The SRA has also furnished an affidavit declaring that it is not disqualified from submitting the resolution plan in terms of the provisions of Section 29(a) of IBC, 2016.” 18. In clause (XIX) of the plan, the SRA has disclosed that it is not disqualified under Section 29A of the Code from submitting the plan. The declaration made in the resolution plan reads thus: -

Page 62 of 83

Page 63 of 83

A separate affidavit has been given by the Resolution Applicant indicating that it does not suffer from any disqualification under Section 29(a) of IBC, 2016 which reads thus: -

Page 64 of 83

Page 65 of 83

It is noted that another partner qua the SRA Praveen Kumar Gupta has also given his separate affidavit to the effect that the SRA does not suffer from disqualification in terms of the provisions of Section 29A. The affidavit is enclosed at page 795 to 796 of the application and reads thus: -

Page 66 of 83

Page 67 of 83

As per the stand taken by the Ld. Counsel for the Resolution Professional, as also by RP who appeared virtually, the SRA has also deposited a cash amount of Rs. 2,12,56,253/- as performance guarantee. The Resolution Professional and his Counsel namely Rajesh Kumar Shrivastava (Enrollment No.- UP 2965/1989) stated at the bar that the SRA has deposited in CIRP account of Corporate Debtor an amount of Rs. 2,12,56,253/- as performance guarantee. The averments to the effect have been made in the resolution plan which reads thus:
“XVIII : PERFORMANCE SECURITY/GUARANTEE The Resolution Applicant hereby undertakes to provide performance security upon issuance of the LOI in the form of RTGS and the interest generated from such performance security shall be provided to the Secured Financial Creditor i.e. IREDA Limited, in addition to the payment proposed above in this resolution plan, as the said interest generated from the amount

Page 68 of 83 provided for the performance security shall not be considered as the revenue generated by the Corporate Debtor. The RA also proposes to adjust the amount of the performance security of Rs. 2,11,98,982/- towards the last installment of payment as required as per the payment timelines provided in this Resolution plan. 22. During the course of hearing Ld. Counsel for the Resolution Professional submitted that the amount of performance guarantee has been kept in fixed deposit in Parliament Street Branch of Bank of Baroda. 23. We find that the value of plan is much beyond the fair value of the Corporate Debtor, assessed by the valuators appointed by the Resolution Professional in terms of the provisions of Regulation 27 of IBBI Regulations, 2016 read with Regulation 35 thereof.
24. Besides we note that in terms of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel India Limited Through Authorised Signatory vs. Satish Kumar Gupta & Ors [Civil Appeal No. 8766- 67 of 2019], it is the subject matter of commercial wisdom of CoC to take decision regarding the amount of bid offered by SRA and the scope for this Tribunal to interfere on such issue is negligible. The above view was also reiterated by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ebix Singapore Private Limited vs. Committee of Creditors of Educomp Solutions Limited & Anr. (Civil Appeal No. 3224 of 2020), the Hon’ble Supreme Court ruled that the scope of examination of the application for approval of Resolution Plan by this Tribunal is confined to the provisions of Section 30(2) of IBC, 2016. Para 153 of the Judgment reads thus: -

Page 69 of 83 “153. Regulation 38(3) mandates that a Resolution Plan be feasible, viable and implementable with specific timelines. A Resolution Plan whose implementation can be withdrawn at the behest of the successful Resolution Applicant, is inherently unviable, since open- ended clauses on modifications/withdrawal would mean that the Plan could fail at an undefined stage, be uncertain, including after approval by the Adjudicating Authority. It is inconsistent to postulate, on the one hand, that no withdrawal or modification is permitted after the approval by the Adjudicating Authority under Section 31, irrespective of the terms of the Resolution Plan; and on the other hand, to argue that the terms of the Resolution Plan relating to withdrawal or modification must be respected, in spite of the CoC’s approval, but prior to the approval by the Adjudicating Authority. The former position follows from the intent, object and purpose of the IBC and from Section 31, and the latter is disavowed by the IBC’s structure and objective. The IBC does not envisage a dichotomy in the binding character of the Resolution Plan in relation to a Resolution Applicant between the stage of approval by the CoC and the approval of the Adjudicating Authority. The binding nature of a Resolution Plan on a Resolution Applicant, who is the proponent of the Plan which has been accepted by the CoC cannot remain indeterminate at the discretion of the Resolution Applicant. The negotiations between the Resolution Applicant and the CoC are brought to an end after the CoC’s approval. The only conditionality that remains is the approval of the Adjudicating Authority, which has a limited jurisdiction to confirm or deny the legal validity of the Resolution Plan in terms of Section 30 (2) of the IBC. If the requirements of Section 30(2) are satisfied, the Adjudicating Authority shall confirm the Plan approved by the CoC under Section 31(1) of the IBC.” 25. The resolution plan also contains the analysis regarding the cause for the default, which is primarily attributable to high interest cost erstwhile management had to bear. Further, the plan also takes note of its feasibility and viability and contains provisions for effective implementation, timelines for approval and the capability of the SRA to implement the plan. The relevant excerpt of the plan in this regard reads thus: -

Page 70 of 83

Page 71 of 83

Page 72 of 83

Page 73 of 83

The plan also contained provisions regarding the manner in which the only pending application under Section 66 of IBC, 2016 and securities/ guarantees would be dealt with and provides thus: - “8. Treatment of Security and Guarantee Provide B The Promoters/Directors of the Corporate Debtor or by any third party. The guarantees/contractual Comforts/Collateral provided by existing shareholders/promoters/ directors/Guarantors /any third party in respect of the debt of the CD shall remain intact in favor· of the financial creditors or any other creditors and shall not be extinguished by virtue of this Resolution Plan and the Banks may proceed against the said guarantees/ contractual

Page 74 of 83 comforts collateral but the Corporate Debtor shall not be made a party to.any legal proceedings whatsoever. However no right of subrogation shall be available to existing shareholders/ promoters/guarantors (or any other person claiming through them), in case of invocation of/ payment by existing shareholders/ directors/promoters /guarantors under their existing guarantees/contractual comforts/collateral and such subrogation rights shall stand permanently waived/ extinguished pursuant to NCLT Approval Order. Moreover, from the date of approval of the resolution plan no one shall have any right to invoke any guarantees/collateral/contractual comforts by the Corporate Debtor to anyone.
9. Treatment of recoveries from PUFE transactions under IBC, 2016- Any recoveries by the Corporate Debtor resolution applicant from the erstwhile promoters I directors or other entities against avoidance transactions (PUFE transactions under IBC, 2016) shall be vested with the Financial Creditors and the expenses for pursuing/follow-up the pending Applications after the Approval date shall be borne by the Financial Creditors themselves. 27. As far as the issue of reliefs and concessions which fall in the jurisdiction of different Government Authorities, and/ or are subjected to the provisions of different laws for the time being in force are concerned, it is made clear that the amount payable by the SRA in terms of the plan to different creditors, stakeholders, and to keep the Corporate Debtor as a going concern cannot be subject to any condition, assumptions, relief/concessions and/or qualification. It also needs to be underlined that the provisions of Section 31(4) of IBC, 2016 mandates the Resolution Applicant to obtain the necessary approval required

Page 75 of 83 under any law for the time being in force within a period of one year from the date of approval of the resolution plan by the Adjudicating Authority under Section 31 of the IBC, 2016. In terms of the provisions of Section 14 of the Code even during the period of CIRP, no default in payment of current dues is a precondition for continuation of the License, Permit, Registration and similar rights. Thus, even during the moratorium period, some of the facilities forming part of the reliefs and concessions sought are made available to the CD only when there is no default in payment of the current dues. On approval of the Resolution Plan, the SRA/CD cannot be put on a better footing by exempting it from paying its legitimate dues under the law. For the sake of convenience, the explanation below Section 14 of the code is extracted below: “14. Moratorium. – (1) Subject to provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3), on the insolvency commencement date, the Adjudicating Authority shall by order declare moratorium for prohibiting all of the following, namely: - (a) ….. (b) ….. (c) ….. (d) the recovery of any property by an owner or lessor where such property is occupied by or in the possession of the corporate debtor.

Explanation.- For the purposes of this sub-section, it is hereby clarified that notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, a licence, permit, registration, quota, concession, clearance or a similar grant or right given by the Central Government, State Government, local authority, sectoral regulator or any other authority constituted under any other law for the time being in force, shall not be suspended or terminated on the grounds of insolvency, subject to the condition that there is no default in payment of current dues arising for the

Page 76 of 83 use or continuation of the license, permit, registration, quota, concession, clearances or a similar grant or right during the moratorium period;” (Emphasis Supplied) 28. In any case, in terms of the provisions of Sections 13 and 15 of the IBC 2016 read with Regulations 6, 6A, 7, 8, 8A, 9 and 9A of IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations 2016, all the claimants such as Operational Creditors, Financial Creditors, Creditors in Class, Workmen and Employees and other Creditors can raise their claims before the IRP/RP. The claims are dealt with by IRP in terms of the provisions of Section 18(1)(b) of the IBC, 2016 and by RP in terms of the provisions of Section 25(1)(b) thereof read with Regulations 12A, 13 and 14 of the IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016. Thereafter, the RP prepares an Information Memorandum in terms of the provisions of Regulation 36(2) of IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016. The Memorandum contains inter alia a list of creditors containing the range of creditors, the amounts claimed by them, the amount of their claim admitted and the security interest if any in respect of such claims. As has been provided in Regulation 36(1) of the Regulations (ibid), the Information Memorandum is required to be submitted in electronic form to each member of CoC, on or before 95th day from the Insolvency commencement date. As has been provided in Regulation 36A of the Regulations the RP publish brief particulars of the invitation for Expression of Interest in Form G of Schedule I to the Regulations at the earliest i.e. not later than 60th day from the Insolvency commencement date, from interested and eligible Prospective Resolution Applicants to submit

Page 77 of 83 Resolution Plans. As can be seen from Regulation 36B of the Regulations, the RP shall issue Information Memorandum Evaluation Matrix (IMEM) and request for Resolution Plans, within 5 days of the date of issue of provisional list of eligible Prospective Resolution Applicants (required to be issued under Regulation 36A(10) of the Regulations). It is with reference to such Information Memorandum Evaluation Matrix that the RP issues request for Resolution Plan. The request for Resolution Plan details each step in the process and the manner and purposes of interaction between the Resolution Professional and the Prospective Resolution Applicant. The Resolution Plan submitted after consideration of the IMEM and RFRP is then examined by the Committee of Creditors. Nevertheless, it needs to satisfy the requirements of Regulation 37 and 38 of the extant Regulations. Once the plan is approved by the CoC, in terms of the provisions of Regulations 39 of the aforementioned Regulations, it virtually becomes a contract entered into between the CD represented through RP, SRA and the Creditors of the CD. On being approved by this Adjudicating Authority, by operation of Section 31(1) of the Code, the plan becomes binding on the Corporate Debtor and its employees, members, creditors (including the Central Government, any State Government or any local authority to whom a debt in respect of the payment of dues arising under any law for the time being enforced such as authorities to whom statutory dues are owed, guarantors and other stakeholders involved in the Resolution Plan. Thus, Section 31(1) of IBC, 2016, takes care of most of the relief/concession/waiver solicited by the Resolution Applicant.

Page 78 of 83 29. Besides, in terms of the provisions of Section 32A, for an offence committed prior to the commencement of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, the liability of the CD ceases and the CD is not liable to be prosecuted from the date of approval of Resolution Plan by this Adjudicating Authority, if the Resolution Plan results in change of management or control of the CD to a person who was not promotor or in the management or control of the CD or a related party of such a person or a person with regard to whom the concerned Investigating Agency has reason to believe that he had abated or conspired for the commission of the offence and has submitted or filed a report or a complaint to the relevant statutory authority or Court. In such cases, where the prosecution is instituted against the CD, during CIRP, the CD stands discharged qua the same from the date of approval of the Resolution Plan. Nevertheless, every person who was a designated partner as defined in clause (j) of Section 2 of the Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008, “an officer who is in default” as defined in Clause (60) of Section 2 of Companies Act, 2013 or was in any manner in charge of, or responsible to the CD for the conduct of his business or associated with the CD in any manner and was directly or indirectly involved in the commission of an offence as per the report submitted or complaint filed by Investigating Agency shall continue to be liable to be prosecuted and punished for such an offence committed by the Corporate Debtor notwithstanding the Corporate Debtors’ liability ceases after approval of the plan. 30. In the wake of the provisions of Section 32A(2), no action is taken against the property of the Corporate Debtor in relation to an offence committed prior to

Page 79 of 83 the commencement of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process of the CD, where such property is covered under Resolution Plan approved by this Authority under Section 31, which result in the change in the control of the CD to a person who was not a promotor or in the management or control of the Corporate Debtor or related party of such person or a person with regard to whom the Investigating Agency has reason to believe that he had abated or conspired for commission of the offence and has submitted or filed a report or complaint to the relevant statutory authority or Court.
31. The action against the property of the Corporate Debtor as referred to in Section 32A of the Code includes the attachment, seizure, retention or confiscation under such law as may be applicable to the Corporate Debtor. One may also be not oblivious of the fact that in the backdrop of provisions of Section 31(3)(a) of the IBC, 2016, the moratorium order passed by the Adjudicating Authority under Section 14 ceases to have effect. In sum and substance, the SRA/CD would be entitled to no other relief/concession/waiver except those, which are available to it as per the provisions of Section 31(1) and 32A of IBC, 2016. 32. In any case, the resolution plan also indicated that irrespective of any grant of any agreed concession by this tribunal as prayed by the SRA, the plan would be implemented. The relevant excerpt of the application reads thus: -

“XVI. RELIEFS SOUGHT/ OTHER TERMS

[…]

Page 80 of 83 Further it is clarified that whether any or all the reliefs sought by the RA is granted or not by the adjudicating authority, this resolution plan shall remain in effect.”
33. The Ld. Counsel for SRA and the SRAs who are present in person stated that they do not have imposed any condition precedent regarding implementation of the plan.
34. It is further directed that the SRA shall implement the plan as per the timelines indicated in the implementation schedule which has been reproduced herein above.
35. In the backdrop of aforementioned factual position, discussion, analysis and findings, the IA-45/2024 filed by the RP for approval of the Resolution Plan is allowed. The Plan submitted by the SRA, certified by the RP is approved. 36. As a sequel, we issue the following directions: -
i. The approved Resolution Plan shall become effective from the date of passing of this Order and shall be implemented strictly as per the term of the plan and implementation schedule given in the Plan;
ii. All claims which have not been dealt with in the Resolution Plan do not survive after the approval of the Resolution Plan;
iii. The SRA/CD would be entitled to no other reliefs/ concessions/waivers except those are available/permissible to it as per the provisions of Section 31(1) and 32A of IBC, 2016. The SRA is at liberty to approach the relevant authorities who would consider these claims as per the provisions of the relevant law in an expeditious manner;

Page 81 of 83 iv. Following steps would be taken in terms of the resolution plan: - SL. NO. STEP TO BE TAKEN TIMELINE FROM DATE OF RECEIPT OF ORDER 1.
Intimation to all the creditors, existing shareholders and other stakeholders of the CD Within 3 days 2.
Constitution of Monitoring Committee Within 3 days
3.
Change in management of CD and appointment of KMP/ Directors
Within 3 days 4.
SRA to infuse funds in the form of debt & equity for payment to Financial Creditors and non- Financial Creditors in accordance with the plan Within 90 days 5.
Issue of shares to new shareholders Within 90 days 6.
Infusion of fund in the form of debt to make the pending payment of the FC as per the amount proposed in resolution plan Within 720 days 7.
Transfer of all assets to the CD and receipt of NOC and other documents from the FC for satisfaction/ modification of charges Within 720 days

Page 82 of 83 v. The SRA shall abide by the timelines mentioned in the resolution plan as given in the table extracted below para 11 of this order. vi. The order of the moratorium in respect to the corporate debtor passed by this Adjudicating Authority under Section 14 of the IBC, 2016 shall cease to have effect from the date of passing of this Order; vii. The SRA shall act in terms of the provisions of Section 31(4) of IBC 2016; viii. The Monitoring Committee shall file the progress report regarding implementation of the Plan before this Adjudicating Authority, every month; ix. The RP shall forward all the records relating to the conduct of the CIRP and the Resolution Plan to the IBBI for its record and database; x. The RP shall also forthwith send a copy of this order to the participants and the Resolution Applicant. He would also send a copy of this order to the ROC concerned within 15 days of this order; xi. The RP shall intimate each claimant about the principle or formulae, as the case may be, for payment of debts under the Plan; 37. The Court Officer and Resolution Professional (RP) shall forthwith make available/send a copy of this Order to the CoC and the Successful Resolution Applicant (SRA) for immediate necessary compliance.
38. A copy of this order shall also be sent by the Court Officer and Applicant to the IBBI and RoC for their record.

Page 83 of 83 IA-4818/2023: The Resolution Professional undertakes to inform the Financial Creditors regarding the pendency of the application and would ensure that the Financial Creditor would take steps to pursue the application in accordance with the law. Let the IA be listed on 05.02.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (SUBRATA KUMAR DASH) (ASHOK KUMAR BHARDWAJ) MEMBER (T)

MEMBER (J)

Iqraa Wasi/ Atul Raj