CS Professional · Insolvency and Bankruptcy - Law and Practice · Group Insolvency

Epsilon Ltd and Zeta Ltd, group companies, are in CIRP before the same NCLT bench. Their resolution professionals file one application for both CIRPs to be run under a common CoC and single resolution plan, claiming that the creditors of both are the same banks and the assets are inseparable. Which consideration would the Tribunal most appropriately weigh, in line with the Supreme Court's approach in Videocon?

The Tribunal would weigh whether the facts, such as common creditors and inseparable assets, justify consolidation in the creditors' interest, while respecting each company's separate identity unless intermingling is clear. A statutory group definition is not a precondition, and promoter consent or name similarity does not decide it.

1. AWhether the Code expressly defines a 'group' for this purpose, failing which the application must be dismissed
2. BWhether the consolidation is justified by the facts and is in the interest of creditors, while preserving each company's legal identity unless intermingling is clearCorrect
3. CWhether the promoters consent to the consolidation
4. DWhether the two companies have identical names in their registration records