IN RE Vs. GUJARAT NRE COKE LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ld. Resolution Professional (RP) as well as Ld. Counsel for the corporate debtor is present.

(2.) Ld. RP has filed the Progress Report dated 20/12/2017, which may be taken on record. Ld. RP submitted that the extended period of submitting the Resolution Plan is going to expire on 01/01/2018. Ld. RP submits that in view of the commencement of the Ordinance to amend the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 notified on 23/11/2017 the Resolution Plan already under consideration could not be considered because of the application of section 29A and that issued fresh publication called for expression of interest regarding submissions of new plan and he received 4(four) plan and it is under consideration of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) and pressed further time for submissions of Resolution Plan and to further extend time period for submission of Resolution Plan. It is clarified that the maximum time limit of 270 days prescribed under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 has been granted. This Adjudicating Authority is not authorised to extend the period of submissions of Resolution Plan beyond 270 days prescribed under the Code. Hence the prayer for further extension is not considered.

(3.) At this juncture Ld. Counsel for the corporate applicant pressed for hearing of C.A. (IB) No. 556/KB/2017 filed by him seeking relief that Committee of Creditors (CoC) be directed to consider the Resolution Plan submitted by the petitioner on behalf of the Corporate Debtor before promulgation of the l Insolvency and Bankruptcy Amendment (Ordinance) 2017 dated 23/11/2017 without being influenced by the provisions of the Ordinance since the same being effective prospectively. Alternatively, petitioner pressed for withdrawal of the main C.P. Ld. Counsel for the Resolution Applicant cited an order passed by the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in CWP-27730-2017 (O&M) Suman Jolly v. Union of India and ors. On the strength of the above order of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court Ld. Counsel for the Resolution Applicant submitted that the Ordinance referred above has no retrospective effect and therefore the Resolution Plan submitted by the defaulting promoter has to be considered by the CoC and for that consideration the RP has to consider the Resolution Plan already submitted before him before the date of commencement of the above Ordinance.