# In the matter of AMR Infrastructure Ltd. CA No. 811(PB)-2018 in (IB)-02(PB)-2017

> NCLT judgment dated 2018-09-29. Citation: TCN-2018-NCLT-00688. The case revolves around an application filed under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 29 Sept 2018
- **Citation:** TCN-2018-NCLT-00688
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-chandigarh/amr-infrastructure-ltd-ca-no-811pb-2018-in-ib-02pb-2017-ed973914

## Summary

### Background

The case revolves around an application filed under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, addressing a deadlock caused by a low percentage of votes cast by a new category of financial creditors: Real Estate (Commercial) and Real Estate (Residential). The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was initiated against AMR Infrastructure Ltd. based on an application by Nikhil Mehta & sons (HUF) &Ors. The Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) faced challenges in obtaining the required voting threshold for key decisions, including ratification of costs and appointment as Resolution Professional (RP), due to low voter turnout from the financial creditors. The IRP sought directions from the NCLT to resolve the deadlock.

## Facts

1. CP No. (IB)-02(PB)/2017 was admitted for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against M/s. AMR Infrastructure Ltd. on 2018-05-10.
2. Mr. Vikram Bajaj was appointed as Interim Resolution Professional (IRP).
3. A public announcement was made on 2018-05-15, with the last date for submission of proof of claim being 2018-05-24.
4. The IRP filed an application being CA-725(PB)/2018 to appoint two authorised representatives, which was allowed on 2018-08-14.
5. The first meeting of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) was scheduled for 2018-08-25.
6. The e-voting window was open from 2018-08-23 to 2018-08-25.
7. Only 52.78% of financial creditors cast votes.
8. The voting percentages for various agenda items, including ratification of IRP costs and appointment of

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the threshold of 'voting shares' in respect of the class of Financial Creditors Real Estate …

**Ratio:** The court applied the principle that statutes should be interpreted to be workable and to

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that strictly applying the 66% threshold in cases where the CoC

…

**Interpretation:** The court interpreted Section 22(2) as directory rather than mandatory in cases

…

**Application:** The court applied this interpretation to the specific facts of the case, where

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** M. M. K…; S. K. MOH…
- **Appellants:** Nikhil Mehta &…; Nikhil Mehta &…
- **Respondents:** AMR Infrastructure…; M/s. AMR Infrastru…
- **Advocates:** Nishant…; Mohit S…; +4 more

## Timeline

- **2017-01-23 — Nikhil Mehta v. AMR…**: Principal Bench found that home buyers would not answer the description of the financial…
- **2018-05-10 — CIRP Init…**: CP No. (IB)-02(PB)/2017 was admitted for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 60(5) — Adjudicating Authority for corporate persons](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-60)

---

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/nclt-chandigarh/amr-infrastructure-ltd-ca-no-811pb-2018-in-ib-02pb-2017-ed973914