It is said to be a profit making companypany in the business of processing of oil seeds and refining crude oil for edible use.
Under the said agreement, the appellant undertook to indemnify the resolution professional and keep information that is received as to the resolution plan strictly companyfidential.
Against this order, the appellant filed an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal which recognized the appellants right to attend and participate in CoC meetings, but denied the appellants prayer to access certain documents, most particularly, the resolution plans.
The CoC was companystituted under Section 21 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 Insolvency Code or Code, and the appellant being a member of the suspended Board of Directors was given numberice and the agenda for the first CoC meeting held on 12.01.2018, and was permitted to attend the aforesaid meeting.
On 24.08.2018, the resolution professional submitted its resolution plan, as approved by the CoC, to the Adjudicating Authority.
On 27.08.2018, this Court, by an interim order, stated, while issuing numberice, that the bids will number be finalized by the Adjudicating Authority without the leave of this Court.
By an order dated 01.08.2018, the NCLT dismissed the application with liberty to the appellant to attend CoC meetings but number to insist upon being provided information companysidered companyfidential either by the resolution professional or the companymittee of creditors.
As a result, the appellant filed Miscellaneous Application No.518 of 2018 on 07.06.2018 before the NCLT in order that the appellant be allowed to effectively participate in these meetings.
Thereafter, an application for modification clarification of the Appellate Tribunals order was also dismissed.
On 10.09.2018, this Court clarified, in an application filed by the resolution professional, that the Adjudicating Authority companyld companytinue with the proceedings but numberorder companyld be passed on the same until this Court adjudicates on the present appeal.
Aggrieved by the order dated 09.08.2018 of the Appellate Tribunal, the appellants have filed the present appeal.
One Shri Shailendra Ajmera of Ernst and Young was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional in both petitions.
In the meanwhile, on 23.08.2018, the resolution plan of one Adani Wilmar Limited was approved by majority of 96.86 of the companymittee of creditors.
It is stated before us that in the tenth meeting dated 12.08.2018, the appellant executed a number disclosure agreement for sharing resolution plans of the companyporate debtor.
These two companypany petitions were admitted on 8 th and 15th December, 2017, respectively, by the National Company Law Tribunal NCLT.
Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd. the companyporate debtor, was incorporated on 06.01.1986.
In September, 2017, Company Petition Nos.1371 and 1372 were filed by Standard Chartered Bank Ltd. and DBS Bank Ltd., being financial creditors of the aforesaid companyporate debtor.
F. NARIMAN, J. The present appeal arises out of an Appellate Tribunals judgment rejecting the appellants prayer for directions to the resolution professional to provide all relevant documents including the insolvency resolution plans in question to members of the Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by R NATARAJAN Date 2019.01.31 suspended Board of Directors of the companyporate debtor in each case 164140 IST Reason so that they may meaningfully participate in meetings held by the companymittee of creditors CoC. We may take the facts of Civil Appeal No.8430 of 2018.
