Unconditional Consent By Sole Financial Creditor Satisfies Requirements Of S.12A IBC & Regulation 30A Of CIRP Regulations: NCLT New Delhi
The National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi, Court-IV, comprising Justice Jyotsna Sharma (Member-Judicial) and Anu Jagmohan Singh (Member-Technical), has held that if there is a stay on the meetings of CoC, then the unconditional consent of the sole financial creditor is sufficient for the withdrawal of the CIRP. The resolution professional filed an application u/s 12A of the IBC...
The National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi, Court-IV, comprising Justice Jyotsna Sharma (Member-Judicial) and Anu Jagmohan Singh (Member-Technical), has held that if there is a stay on the meetings of CoC, then the unconditional consent of the sole financial creditor is sufficient for the withdrawal of the CIRP.
The resolution professional filed an application u/s 12A of the IBC read with regulation 30A of the CIRP Regulation, seeking withdrawal of the CIRP of the corporate debtor. In the application the resolution professional had prayed to set aside the order initiating CIRP of the corporate debtor. The NCLAT directed the NCLT to dispose of the application expeditiously, but in the same order, it also stayed the meeting of the CoC till the disposal of the application.
Contention of the Parties
The applicant submitted that the corporate debtor and the operational creditor have reached a settlement before the constitution of the CoC, and a deed has been signed to execute that deed. It highlighted that the FA was executed.
It also submitted that the HDFC Bank, the sole member of the CoC, had no objection to the withdrawal of the CIRP. The bank also filed an unconditional affidavit for withdrawal of the CIRP.
Observations of the Tribunal
The tribunal observed that the CoC was constituted with the sole financial creditor. The withdrawal of a Section 9 application is governed by Section 12A, which says that the adjudicating authority can only permit the withdrawal if it has been approved by 90% of the CoC.
The adjudicating authority observed that section 12A and regulation 30A prescribe the approval of 90% of the CoC for withdrawal of the application, and here in this case the applicant has rightly complied with the said provision, as the sole financial creditor has issued a no objection.
It also highlighted that when all the facts were produced before the Hon'ble NCLAT, it directed the adjudicating authority to dispose of the application. Hence, considering the settlement between the parties and the unconditional consent of the sole financial creditor, the adjudicating authority allowed the application. 100% approval of the CoC.
Case Name: Mrs. Neha Bhasin, Interim Resolution Profesional for Victory Electric Vehicles International Ltd.
Case No.: IA 2483/2025 in CP (IB) 723/ND/2023
Bench: Justice Jyotsna Sharma (Member-Judicial) and Anu Jagmohan Singh (Member-Technical)
Order Date: 21.08.2025