Skip to content

CS Professional · Insolvency and Bankruptcy - Law and Practice · Adjudication and Appeals for Corporate Persons

The NCLT approved the resolution plan for Vishwa Cements Ltd. Rohan, a creditor, files an appeal on the 20th day, alleging (a) the plan contravenes a law in force, (b) the resolution professional committed material irregularity during the CIRP, and (c) insolvency resolution process costs were not provided for repayment in priority. Which assessment is correct?

All three grounds are permitted under section 61(3): contravention of law, material irregularity by the resolution professional, and failure to provide for process costs in priority. Filing on day 20 is within the 30-day period in section 61(2), so the appeal is maintainable.

  1. AOnly ground (a) is valid
  2. BGrounds (a) and (b) are valid but (c) is not
  3. COnly ground (c) is valid, since costs are the only financial ground
  4. DAll three are permitted grounds under section 61(3), and the appeal is within timeCorrect

Explanation

Section 61(3)(i) covers contravention of law, (ii) covers material irregularity by the resolution professional during the CIRP, and (iv) covers failure to provide for process costs in priority. The appeal on day 20 is within the 30 days under section 61(2). Hence all grounds are permissible and timing is fine.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Adjudication and Appeals for Corporate Persons shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Adjudication and Appeals for Corporate PersonsFree diagnostic mock

More Adjudication and Appeals for Corporate Persons questions