# In the matter of Churakulam Tea Estate Private Limited IA-37-(KOB)-2021 in IBA-21-KOB-2019

> NCLT judgment dated 2021-06-30. Citation: TCN-2021-NCLT-01893. The case involves an application (IA/37/KOB/2021) filed by the Resolution Applicant, Jose…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 30 Jun 2021
- **Citation:** TCN-2021-NCLT-01893
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-chandigarh/churakulam-tea-estate-private-limited-ia-37-kob-2021-in-iba-21-kob-2019-71b65c85

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an application (IA/37/KOB/2021) filed by the Resolution Applicant, Jose Pradeep, under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking modifications to the resolution plan. The applicant requested modifications to incorporate a mutually agreed position regarding a grace period for payments, permission to follow a revised timeline based on mutual agreement during the 9th CoC meeting, or an extension of two months due to the applicant's medical condition. The resolution plan was initially submitted on 26.08.2020, but the Committee of Creditors (CoC) requested revisions. The applicant faced delays due to testing positive for Covid-19 and subsequent complications. The Resolution Professional filed IA/173/KOB/2020 seeking a further

…

## Facts

Jose Pradeep, the Resolution Applicant, filed IA/37/KOB/2021 seeking modifications to the approved resolution plan under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The applicant requested a grace period for payments due to Covid-19 related complications. The initial resolution plan was submitted on 26.08.2020, but revisions were required by the CoC. The applicant tested positive for Covid-19, causing delays. The Resolution Professional filed IA/173/KOB/2020 for an extension, which was granted until 26.11.2020. The revised resolution plan was approved by the CoC in their 9th meeting, with a mutually agreed grace period clause. The applicant could not attend the 10th CoC meeting due to illness. The approved resolution plan stipulated an upfront

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority can modify a …

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

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Rahul Jain v. Rave Scans Pvt. Ltd,

…

**Interpretation:** This interpretation emphasizes the importance of adhering to the terms of the

…

**Application:** In this case, the applicant sought to modify the resolution plan to incorporate

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Kumar…; Satya Ranjan…
- **Appellants:** Jose Pr…
- **Respondents:** M/s Churakulam…; C.A. Jasi…

## Timeline

- **2020-03-23 — Finalisation of Application as Resolution…**: The applicant's application as…
- **2020-08-26 — First Resolution Plan…**: The applicant submitted…

## 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/churakulam-tea-estate-private-limited-ia-37-kob-2021-in-iba-21-kob-2019-71b65c85