NCLT New Delhi Rules, Unconditional Consent By Sole Financial Creditor Satisfies Requirements Of S.12A IBC & Regulation 30A Of CIRP Regulations
Pranav B Prem
The National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi, Court-IV, has held that where the Committee of Creditors (CoC) consists of only one financial creditor, the unconditional consent of that sole creditor is sufficient to meet the statutory requirement of 90% approval under Section 12A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and Regulation 30A of the CIRP Regulations. The Bench comprising Justice Jyotsna Sharma (Member-Judicial) and Anu Jagmohan Singh (Member-Technical) allowed the resolution professional’s application for withdrawal of the CIRP after noting that the financial creditor had given full, unconditional approval to the settlement.
The resolution professional had filed the application under Section 12A seeking withdrawal of the corporate debtor’s CIRP and prayed for setting aside the admission order. Earlier, the NCLAT had directed the adjudicating authority to dispose of the withdrawal application expeditiously, and in the same order, it had stayed further meetings of the CoC until the Section 12A application was decided.
It was submitted before the Tribunal that the corporate debtor and the operational creditor had entered into a settlement prior to the CoC taking any effective steps. A settlement deed was executed, and the financial agreement was placed on record. It was further submitted that HDFC Bank, the sole financial creditor forming 100% of the CoC, had no objection to the withdrawal of the CIRP. The bank had filed an unconditional affidavit expressly consenting to the withdrawal.
While examining the requirements of Section 12A, the Tribunal observed that withdrawal of an application admitted under Section 9 requires approval of 90% of the voting share of the CoC. In cases where the CoC comprises only one financial creditor, the 90% requirement automatically translates to complete consent of that sole creditor. The Tribunal noted that in the present matter, the applicant had complied with this statutory mandate since the only financial creditor had provided unconditional approval.
The Bench also took note of the NCLAT’s earlier directions, which had not only asked the adjudicating authority to decide the Section 12A application but had also stayed CoC meetings during that period. Since all relevant facts, including the settlement and the creditor’s unconditional consent, were placed before the appellate tribunal, the NCLT held that no further impediment remained for allowing the withdrawal.
In light of the settlement between the parties and the categorical no-objection filed by HDFC Bank, the Tribunal concluded that the requirement of approval by 90% of the CoC stood fully satisfied. It therefore allowed the resolution professional’s application and permitted withdrawal of the CIRP.
Cause Title: Mrs. Neha Bhasin, Interim Resolution Profesional for Victory Electric Vehicles International Ltd.
Case No: IA 2483/2025 in CP (IB) 723/ND/2023
Coram: Justice Jyotsna Sharma (Member-Judicial), Anu Jagmohan Singh (Member-Technical)
