# In the matter of Sai Balaji Facility vs. CA Ramchandra Dallaram Choudhary, RP for Adico Forge Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2024-09-19. Citation: TCN-2024-NCLAT-00191. This is a Company Appeal filed by an Operational Creditor challenging the order dated…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 19 Sept 2024
- **Citation:** TCN-2024-NCLAT-00191
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/sai-balaji-facility-vs-ca-ramchandra-dallaram-choudhary-rp-for-adico-forge-pvt-l-34f6f72e

## Summary

### Background

This is a Company Appeal filed by an Operational Creditor challenging the order dated 02.05.2024 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Mumbai Bench, Court-III, in I.A No. 5826 of 2023. The Adjudicating Authority allowed the IA filed by the Resolution Professional under Section 30(6) and Section 31 of the IBC seeking approval of the Resolution Plan. The CIRP against the Corporate Debtor commenced on 23.06.2023. The Appellant submitted its claim on 19.10.2023 in Form B for dues amounting to Rs.16,77,047/-. The Resolution Plan was approved by the CoC in its 9th meeting with a majority of 92.87% vote share.

## Facts

The Corporate Debtor underwent CIRP commencing on 23.06.2023. The Appellant, an Operational Creditor, submitted a claim of Rs.16,77,047/- on 19.10.2023, which was admitted by the Resolution Professional. The Resolution Plan was approved by the CoC with a 92.87% vote share. The Resolution Plan proposed 'nil' payment to all operational creditors, including government dues. The Adjudicating Authority approved the Resolution Plan on 02.05.2024. The Appellant filed an appeal against this approval, arguing that it violated Section 30(2) of the IBC. The total claim of operational creditors admitted in the CIRP was Rs.9,54,85,539/-. The Appellant's claim was admitted, but the Resolution Plan proposed no payment to the operational creditor, which is the core of the dispute.

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Resolution Plan, proposing 'nil' payment to operational creditors, violates Section …

**Ratio:** Section 30(2)(b) of the IBC mandates that a resolution plan must provide for the payment

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal referred to its previous judgment in Rajat Metaal Polychem Pvt. Ltd. vs. Mr.

…

**Interpretation:** Section 30(2)(b) is interpreted to mean that operational creditors should

…

**Application:** In this case, the Respondents argued that the liquidation value available to

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Barun M…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Sai Balaji…
- **Respondents:** Adico Forge Pvt.…; CA Ramchandra…

## Timeline

- **2023-06-23 — CIRP Commen…**: CIRP against the…
- **2023-10-19 — Claim Subm…**: Appellant submitted its claim in Form B…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 30(6) — Submission of resolution plan](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-30)

---

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/sai-balaji-facility-vs-ca-ramchandra-dallaram-choudhary-rp-for-adico-forge-pvt-l-34f6f72e