ArcelorMittal India Private Limited, an appellant and a resolution applicant, challenged the decision of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) to reject its resolution plan in favor of Royale Partners Investment Fund Limited's plan, which was approved by a 73.14% majority. The appellant filed a Miscellaneous Application questioning this decision, which was initially rejected by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Mumbai Bench. The appellant argued that the CoC's decision contravened Section 31(4) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (I&B Code) by not obtaining prior approval from the Competition Commission of India (CCI). ArcelorMittal also contended that its resolution plan was superior and aligned with the I&B Code's objectives. The CoC
…ArcelorMittal India Private Limited, a resolution applicant, submitted a resolution plan that was rejected by the Committee of Creditors (CoC). The CoC, with a majority vote of 73.14%, approved the resolution plan submitted by Royale Partners Investment Fund Limited. ArcelorMittal challenged this decision, arguing that its plan was superior and that the CoC violated Section 31(4) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (I&B Code) by not obtaining prior approval from the Competition Commission of India (CCI). The CoC rejected ArcelorMittal's plan because it did not maximize the value of the company's assets, particularly concerning receivables with a book value of approximately 700 crores. The offer made by ArcelorMittal was significantly lower than the liquidation
…Sign in to view the parties.
Appellant was…
Appellant was…
ArcelorMittal India Private Limited, an appellant and a resolution applicant, challenged the decision of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) to reject its resolution plan in favor of Royale Partners Investment Fund Limited's plan, which was approved by a 73.14% majority. The appellant filed a Miscellaneous Application questioning this decision, which was initially rejected by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Mumbai Bench. The appellant argued that the CoC's decision contravened Section 31(4) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (I&B Code) by not obtaining prior approval from the Competition Commission of India (CCI). ArcelorMittal also contended that its resolution plan was superior and aligned with the I&B Code's objectives. The CoC
…ArcelorMittal India Private Limited, a resolution applicant, submitted a resolution plan that was rejected by the Committee of Creditors (CoC). The CoC, with a majority vote of 73.14%, approved the resolution plan submitted by Royale Partners Investment Fund Limited. ArcelorMittal challenged this decision, arguing that its plan was superior and that the CoC violated Section 31(4) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (I&B Code) by not obtaining prior approval from the Competition Commission of India (CCI). The CoC rejected ArcelorMittal's plan because it did not maximize the value of the company's assets, particularly concerning receivables with a book value of approximately 700 crores. The offer made by ArcelorMittal was significantly lower than the liquidation
…Appellant was…
Appellant was…