In a 51-page order, a two-judge bench comprising NCLAT president Ashok Bhushan and Arun Baroka directed the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) to reactivate SEML's petition requesting approval of the agreement within 60 days. The court also kept the door open to competing bidders. torrent power and Vantage Point Asset Management to file new appeals if they have new grounds for any challenge.
"We have noticed that no opportunity was given to the successful resolution applicant (SEML), resolution professional and CoC... to avoid delay in resolution of the matter," the appellate court said. It gave two weeks to SEML, the resolution professional (RP) and the CoC to file their reply and other materials before the NCLT.
The appellate court's order is a relief for SEML, though it still requires approval from the NCLT.
"RP Ashish Rathi has already filed an application in the NCLT seeking revival of the petition for approval of the scheme. It will most likely be taken up after the (NCLT) summer vacation next month," said a person in the know. of process. "It remains to be seen whether the plaintiffs (Torrent Power and Vantage Point) raise further objections to this ground," he added.
Rathi did not respond to an email seeking comment. The NCLAT order was in response to a petition by SEML, challenging the NCLT's direction to the CoC in October to reconsider its decision. At the time, the NCLT had said that the CoC's decision was based on incomplete financial data, making the decision-making process "perverse and susceptible to interference".
The NCLAT, for its decision, relied on a Supreme Court order in another case that said a minor procedural violation, or any other similar reason, was not enough to term a decision as perverse. "In case all the relevant materials are available before the CoC, which deliberates, no perversity can be imputed in the decision," the NCLAT said.
Nagpur-based SEML was declared the winner in June last year, against Torrent, Vantage and Jindal Power in a close fight with less than a percentage point difference between the bids of the four highest bidders. SKS owes โน1,890 crore to Bank of Baroda and State Bank of India. The facility is in high demand because it is a rare operating power station available for sale with a 25-year fuel agreement accompanying a rail line.
Jindal had also filed a late application seeking certain reliefs from the NCLAT, but the court refused to grant any relief. The importance of the case can be gauged from the battery of heavyweight lawyers representing different parties in the case: Harish Salve (for SEML), Mukul Rohatgi (CoC), Kapil Sibal (Torrent) and K Venugopal (Jindal Power) .
