NCLAT Allows Appeal in Insolvency Resolution Process — Directs Full Payment of Employee Dues. The Tribunal found that the approved Resolution Plan violated provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code regarding employee gratuity and provident fund payments.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: CHENNAI
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appeal involved 28 former employees of Hindustan Newsprint Limited (HNL) challenging the approval of a Resolution Plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The employees contended that their claims for gratuity and leave encashment were not adequately considered in the plan approved by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on 29.01.2021. The NCLT had approved the plan submitted by KINFRA, which provided only partial payments to the employees, leading to the appeal. The Appellants argued that the Resolution Professional undervalued the Corporate Debtor's assets and failed to adhere to the principles of natural justice by not allowing them to participate in the proceedings. The Resolution Professional countered that the claims were admitted in full and that the plan complied with the provisions of the Code. The Tribunal analyzed the legal requirements under Section 30(2) of the Code and referenced previous judgments that mandated full payment of provident fund and gratuity dues. It concluded that the approved plan's treatment of these claims was insufficient and directed that they be paid in full. The appeal was allowed in part, affirming the need for compliance with statutory obligations regarding employee dues.

Headnote

A) Insolvency Law - Resolution Plan Approval - Compliance with Legal Provisions - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Sections 30(2), 31(1) - The Appellants challenged the approval of the Resolution Plan on grounds that it inadequately addressed their claims for gratuity and provident fund. The Tribunal held that the approved plan violated Section 30(2) by not providing full payment for these dues, directing that they be paid in full as per applicable laws (Paras 12-16).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the approved Resolution Plan adequately addressed the claims of gratuity and provident fund for former employees of the Corporate Debtor.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, directing that the provident fund and gratuity dues be paid in full as per the provisions of the relevant laws, while upholding the rest of the approved Resolution Plan.

Law Points

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code
  • 2016
  • Section 30(2)
  • Section 31(1)
  • Payment of Gratuity Act
  • 1972
  • Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act
  • 1952
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (07) 117

Company Appeal (AT)(CH)(Ins) No. 40/2021

2026-07-16

Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, Jatindranath Swain

Mr. Santhosh, Mr. PV Vinod, Ms. Srishti Thukral

Mathew C.K., Chacko K.M., Rajagopal B., Thankamony T.K., Sudarsanakumar V.P., Anu Boban, Ouseph Antony, Pareekunnu P.V., Ravi N.T., Murali M.P., Joy K., Pappachan K.J., Ravindran Nair T M, Sreepathy R., Harikumar P.S., Narayan A, Binu K, Shaji K G, Radhakrishnan K G, Dr. Latha K K, Augustin T A, Narayana Namboodiri C, Jose Paul, Thankappan P G, Joseph KC, Varghese V M, Thulasi Pisharasiar, Philip C Kurian

Shri Kumar Rajan, RBL Bank Ltd., Hindustan Newsprint Limited, Kerala Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation (KINFRA)

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against the approval of a Resolution Plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

Remedy Sought

Appellants sought to set aside the impugned order and ensure full payment of gratuity and provident fund claims.

Filing Reason

Claims were not adequately addressed in the approved Resolution Plan.

Previous Decisions

The NCLT had approved the Resolution Plan without considering the full claims of the Appellants.

Issues

Whether the approved Resolution Plan adequately addressed the claims of gratuity and provident fund for former employees. Whether the Resolution Professional undervalued the assets of the Corporate Debtor.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellants argued that their claims for gratuity and provident fund were not fully considered in the Resolution Plan. Resolution Professional contended that all claims were admitted and treated equally under the plan.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held that the approved Resolution Plan violated the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code regarding the payment of employee dues, specifically provident fund and gratuity, which must be paid in full as per statutory requirements.

Judgment Excerpts

The approved plan violated Section 30(2) by not providing full payment for these dues. The Tribunal is of the earnest view that both Provident Fund and Gratuity Fund is to be paid in full as per the Provisions of ‘EPF and NP Act, 1952’ and ‘Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972’.

Procedural History

The appeal was filed against the NCLT's order dated 29.01.2021, which approved the Resolution Plan submitted by KINFRA, leading to the current proceedings.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: 30(2), 31(1)
  • Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972:
  • Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Recruitment Process for Group 1 Services in Andhra Pradesh — Validity of Notifications Affirmed.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Alters Conviction in Murder Case Due to Excessive Force in Self-Defence. The Court Found that the Accused Exceeded the Right of Private Defence Leading to a Lesser Charge under Section 304 IPC.