NCLAT Rules that Regulation 39(1A) Cannot be Read as Fetter on Powers of CoC to Deliberate and Further Negotiate with RPs

Our undertakings for long-term impact are an organic extension of our purpose.

They are to employ our deep knowledge of the law beyond the business, the transaction, the deal. To use the opportunities and skills we possess, to reflect on the culture we’re creating. Individually and collectively, these are our efforts to help shape the thinking of our future generations, and arm them with strategies for true, sustainable growth.

Mar 31, 2023

NCLAT Rules that Regulation 39(1A) Cannot be Read as Fetter on Powers of CoC to Deliberate and Further Negotiate with RPs

In Vistra ITCL v. Torrent Investments Pvt. Ltd.^[1], the NCLAT held that Regulation 39 (1A) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 can neither foreclose nor prohibit the Committee of Creditors (‘CoC’) from negotiating with Resolution Applicants (‘RP(s)’) or asking the RPs to further increase the value of the resolution plan received under the challenge mechanism. The NCLAT further held that even after completion of the challenge mechanism, pursuant to Regulation 39(1A)(b), the CoC retains its jurisdiction to negotiate with the RPs or to annul the resolution process and re-issue the request for a resolution plan.

[1] Vistra ITCL v. Torrent Investments Pvt Ltd, Company Appeal(AT)(Ins) Nos. 132, 133, 134 of 2023.

DISCLAIMER

These are the views and opinions of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Firm. This article is intended for general information only and does not constitute legal or other advice and you acknowledge that there is no relationship (implied, legal or fiduciary) between you and the author/AZB. AZB does not claim that the article's content or information is accurate, correct or complete, and disclaims all liability for any loss or damage caused through error or omission.