# In the matter of Pradeep M.R Vs.  Ravindra Beleyur and Ors. Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 306,307,315,554 of 2019

> NCLAT judgment dated 2020-07-29. Citation: TCN-2020-NCLAT-00188. The case involves multiple appeals (Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 306 of 2019, 307 of 2019,…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 29 Jul 2020
- **Citation:** TCN-2020-NCLAT-00188
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/pradeep-mr-vs-ravindra-beleyur-and-ors-company-appeal-06c6a6a8

## Summary

### Background

The case involves multiple appeals (Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 306 of 2019, 307 of 2019, 315 of 2019 and 554 of 2019) filed under Section 32 and 61(3) of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, challenging the order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Chennai Bench, which approved a Resolution Plan for Merchem Limited. The appeals raise concerns about the fairness and legality of the Resolution Plan, including issues related to statutory dues, retrenchment of employees, sale of assets, and the treatment of operational creditors and related parties.

## Facts

Merchem Limited underwent Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The NCLT Chennai Bench approved a Resolution Plan. Several appeals were filed against this approval. Pradeep M.R., an employee of Merchem Limited, filed an appeal (No. 306 of 2019) arguing the plan was a sale of assets disguised as a resolution and lacked provisions for employee dues and fair retrenchment. Ravindra Beleyur was the Resolution Professional. State Bank of India was a creditor. Acme Chem Limited was the Resolution Applicant. P.E. Thomas, Grove Limited and Sugathan Lakshmanan also filed appeals (No. 307 of 2019, 315 of 2019 and 554 of 2019 respectively). P.E. Thomas was the owner of the factory and entered into a license agreement with Merchem Limited. Sugathan Lakshmanan was an

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Resolution Plan approved by the Adjudicating Authority is in compliance with the …

**Ratio:** The Resolution Plan must comply with the I&B Code, 2016 and other applicable laws,

…

**Reasoning:** The court noted that the setting off of losses under the Income Tax Act, 1961 is subject

…

**Interpretation:** This means that the Resolution Plan must adhere to all existing laws, including

…

**Application:** The court directed the Resolution Applicant to provide an affidavit regarding

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Kumar…; Jarat Kuma…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Pradeep…
- **Respondents:** Merchem L…; RavindraB…
- **Advocates:** Rohan Rajas…; Jitendra…; +9 more

## Timeline

- **2017-01-01 — CP/689/IB…**: Proceedings before the National…
- **2018-01-15 — CIRP Init…**: Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 32 — Appeal](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-32)

---

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/pradeep-mr-vs-ravindra-beleyur-and-ors-company-appeal-06c6a6a8