# In the matter of IDBI Bank vs. Mamta Binani Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 553 of 2019

> NCLAT judgment dated 2022-09-02. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLAT-00245. This case involves an appeal against an order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 2 Sept 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLAT-00245
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/idbi-bank-vs-mamta-binani-company-appeal-f7982cd2

## Summary

### Background

This case involves an appeal against an order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench) regarding a resolution plan for Deccan Chronicle Holdings Ltd. The appellant, IDBI Bank, a member of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) and a financial creditor, challenged the resolution plan submitted by Vision India Fund, alleging it was illegal, discriminatory, and violated the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The appellant contended that the Adjudicating Authority erroneously dismissed their application based on a misinterpretation of facts and law.

## Facts

IDBI Bank, a financial creditor and member of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) of Deccan Chronicle Holdings Ltd. (the Corporate Debtor), filed an application challenging a resolution plan submitted by Vision India Fund. The resolution plan, dated 11.12.2018, was alleged to be discriminatory and in violation of the IBC. IDBI Bank claimed that the Adjudicating Authority erroneously dismissed their application. The appellant argued that the resolution plan discriminated against them by categorizing financial creditors into 'A' and 'B' categories, undervaluing their security interest, and offering them a disproportionately low amount (3.9% of the total cash payment) compared to their admitted financial debt (6.71%). IDBI Bank had raised objections during CoC meetings,

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Appellant is entitled to claim relief under Section 60(5) when the Resolution Plan was …

**Ratio:** Once a resolution plan is approved by the CoC and the Adjudicating Authority, it attains

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLAT reasoned that the appellant did not challenge the approved Resolution Plan

…

**Interpretation:** Section 60(5) of the IBC cannot be used as a tool to circumvent the provisions

…

**Application:** The NCLAT held that the appellant's attempt to challenge the approved

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; M. Satyanarayana…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** IDBI…
- **Respondents:** Deccan Chronicle…; ΜΑΜΤΑ B…

## Timeline

- **2017-01-01 — Company Pe…**: C.P.(IB) No. 41/7/HDB/2017 filed before the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law…
- **2018-07-09 — Resolution Plan…**: Resolution Plan was re-submitted by Resolution Applicant for CoC voting which was…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 61 — Appeals and Appellate Authority](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-61)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/idbi-bank-vs-mamta-binani-company-appeal-f7982cd2