Supreme Court Upholds Committee of Creditors' Authority in Insolvency Proceedings — Clarifies Binding Nature of Resolution Plans. The court ruled that the Committee of Creditors cannot withdraw an approved Resolution Plan once it has been submitted to the Adjudicating Authority under Section 31 of the IBC.

  • 21
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute arose from the appeal filed by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) against the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal's (NCLAT) decision which denied their request to withdraw an approved Resolution Plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). The CoC had initially approved the Resolution Plan, but later sought to withdraw it, citing improvements in the financial position of the Corporate Debtor (CD) and potential windfall gains for the Successful Resolution Applicant (SRA). The NCLAT ruled that the CoC lacked jurisdiction to withdraw the plan, emphasizing the binding nature of the Resolution Plan once approved. The appellants argued that the improved financial position of the CD warranted a reconsideration of the plan, while the SRA contended that the CoC was bound by its earlier approval. The Supreme Court upheld the NCLAT's decision, reiterating that the CoC's authority does not extend to withdrawing an approved plan after it has been submitted for confirmation to the Adjudicating Authority. The court highlighted that the IBC framework does not allow for such withdrawals and that the CoC's commercial wisdom cannot be exercised to the detriment of the binding nature of the Resolution Plan. The court directed that the applications pending before the NCLT be considered expeditiously, taking into account the delay already experienced. The appeal was disposed of, and any pending applications were rejected.

Headnote

A) Insolvency Law - Authority of Committee of Creditors - Withdrawal of Resolution Plan - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 12A - The court held that the Committee of Creditors does not have the jurisdiction to withdraw an approved Resolution Plan once it has been submitted to the Adjudicating Authority, as the binding nature of the plan is established under the IBC framework. The court emphasized that the commercial wisdom of the CoC is paramount, but it cannot unilaterally withdraw its approval post-approval by the Adjudicating Authority (Paras 1-25).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Committee of Creditors can withdraw approval of a Resolution Plan after it has been approved by a majority.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court upheld the NCLAT's decision, ruling that the Committee of Creditors does not have the jurisdiction to withdraw an approved Resolution Plan once it has been submitted to the Adjudicating Authority. The court directed that the pending applications be considered expeditiously by the NCLT.

Law Points

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code
  • 2016
  • Committee of Creditors
  • Resolution Plan
  • Adjudicating Authority
  • commercial wisdom
  • withdrawal of Resolution Plan
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (SC) (10) 81

Civil Appeal No.12045 of 2026

2026-10-26

K. Vinod Chandran, J., J. B. Pardiwala

Gopal Sankarnarayan, Nidhesh Gupta, Nikhhil Nayyar

Bank of India & Ors.

S.M. Kamal Pasha & Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against the NCLAT's decision regarding the withdrawal of a Resolution Plan.

Remedy Sought

The Committee of Creditors sought to withdraw the approved Resolution Plan.

Filing Reason

The financial position of the Corporate Debtor improved, prompting the CoC to seek withdrawal.

Previous Decisions

The NCLAT ruled that the CoC could not withdraw the Resolution Plan, emphasizing its binding nature.

Issues

Whether the Committee of Creditors can withdraw approval of a Resolution Plan after it has been approved by a majority.

Submissions/Arguments

The appellants argued that the improved financial position of the Corporate Debtor warranted withdrawal of the Resolution Plan. The SRA contended that the CoC was bound by its earlier approval and could not withdraw the plan.

Ratio Decidendi

The Committee of Creditors cannot withdraw an approved Resolution Plan after it has been submitted to the Adjudicating Authority, as the binding nature of the plan is established under the IBC framework.

Judgment Excerpts

The court held that the Committee of Creditors does not have the jurisdiction to withdraw an approved Resolution Plan once it has been submitted to the Adjudicating Authority. The binding nature of the Resolution Plan has the consequence of preventing the CoC or the resolution applicant from reneging from its terms after the plan has been approved by the CoC through a voting mechanism.

Procedural History

The NCLT allowed the withdrawal application filed by the Resolution Professional, which was approved by the CoC. The NCLAT found this withdrawal to be in violation of the IBC and ruled against it, leading to the appeal before the Supreme Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: Section 12A, Section 30, Section 31, Section 74
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Distribution Licensee's Appeal in Electricity Theft Assessment Case — High Court's Directions Found Erroneous. Court Clarifies Distinction Between Theft and Unauthorized Use of Electricity Under Sections 135 and 126 of the Ele...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Landlady's Appeal in Eviction Case Due to Non-Impleadment of Married Daughters. Non-Participation of Daughters in Business Established Their Surrender of Tenancy Rights Under Section 3(a)(2) of U.P. Urban Building (Regulation of ...