DR.DHANANJAYA Y.CHANDRACHUD, J. - (1.) This judgment has been divided into sections to facilitate analysis. Further, a Glossary of defined terms which have been used throughout the judgment has also been provided. The sections in the judgment are as follows: Glossary A Civil Appeal No 3224 of 2020 - the Ebix Appeal A.1 The appeal A.2 Initiation of CIRP A.3 Invitation, submission and approval of Resolution Plan A.4 Investigations into financial transactions of Educomp A.5 Applications for withdrawal of the Resolution Plan A.6 Orders of NCLT and NCLAT A.7 Present status of SFIO and CBI investigation B Civil Appeal No 3560 of 2020 - the Kundan Care Appeal B.1 The appeal B.2 Initiation of CIRP B.3 Invitation, submission and approval of Resolution Plan B.4 Astonfield's dispute with GUVNL B.5 Withdrawal of the Resolution Plan C Civil Appeal No 295 of 2021 - the Seroco Appeal C.1 The appeal C.2 Initiation of CIRP C.3 Submission and Approval of Resolution Plan C.4 Modification of the Resolution Plan D Submissions of counsel in the Ebix Appeal D.1 Submissions for the appellant D.2 Submissions for the first respondent D.3 Submissions for the second respondent E Submissions of counsel in the Kundan Care Appeal E.1 Submissions for the appellant E.2 Submissions for the first respondent E.3 Submissions for the second respondent F Submissions of counsel in the Seroco Appeal F.1 Submissions for the appellant F.2 Submissions for the second and third respondents G Purpose of a law on insolvency H Nature of a Resolution Plan I Statutory framework governing the CIRP J Withdrawal of the Resolution Plan by a successful Resolution Applicant under the IBC J.1 The absence of a legislative hook or a regulatory tether to enable a withdrawal J.2 Terms of the Resolution Plan are not sufficient to effect withdrawals or modifications after its submission to the Adjudicating Authority K Factual Analysis K.1 The Ebix Appeal K.1.1 Res Judicata K.1.2 Analysis of the Resolution Plan of Ebix K.1.3 Duties of the RP K.2 The Kundan Care Appeal K.3 The Seroco Appeal L Conclusion Glossary JUDGEMENT_41_LAWS(SC)9_2021_1.html A Civil Appeal No 3224 of 2020 - the Ebix Appeal A.1 The appeal 1. This judgment arises out of an appeal from a judgment dated 29 July 2020 of the NCLAT. The NCLAT allowed the Withdrawal Appeal(Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No 203 of 2020) instituted by the first respondent, E-CoC, under Section 61 of the IBC against a judgment dated 2 January 2020 of the NCLT at its Principal Bench in New Delhi.
(2.) The NCLT allowed the Third Withdrawal Application(CA No 1816 (PB) of 2019 in CP (IB) No 101 (PB) of 2017) filed by Ebix under Section 60(5) of the IBC to withdraw its Resolution Plan submitted for Educomp. While reversing that order, the NCLAT held that the application to withdraw from the Resolution Plan could not have been allowed since: (i) it was barred by res judicata; and (ii) the NCLT does not have jurisdiction to permit such a withdrawal. The correctness of the view of the NCLAT comes up for determination in the present appeal. A.2 Initiation of CIRP
(3.) On 5 May 2017, Educomp filed a petition(CP (IB) No 101 (PB) of 2017) under Section 10 of the IBC seeking to initiate voluntary CIRP. The NCLT admitted this petition on 30 May 2017, and appointed an IRP. Hence, 30 May 2017 would be taken as the 'Insolvency Commencement Date' for the purposes of Section 5(12) of the IBC.;