Mr. V. Ramaswamy is former Director of Corporate Debtor namely M/s Narmada Project Limited an application field with Resolution Professional (RP) to provide 'Resolution Plan'. But RP denied to provide 'Resolution Plan' t

In the matter of Vijay Kumar Jain v. Standard Chartered Bank and others, an appeal was filed with Supreme Court against orders rejecting the prayer of an erstwhile director for getting copy of the resolution plans from the RP. Both the NCLT and NCLAT ruled that appellant had no right to receive the resolution plans. The Resolution Professioal (RP) has contended that only the members of CoC are entitled to have resolution plans, as per Section 30(3) IBC read with Regulation 39(2) CIRP Regulations. Relying on the Notes on Clauses to Section 24 of the Code, they argued that the members of suspended Board of directors are permitted to participate in CoC meetings only for the purpose of giving information regarding the financial status of the debtor. The Supreme Court expressly rejected the argument based on Notes on Clauses to Section 24 of the Code and noted that every participant is entitled to a notice of every meeting of the committee of creditors. Such notice of meeting must contain an agenda of the meeting, together with the copies of all documents relevant for matters to be discussed and the issues to be voted upon at the meeting vide regulation 21 (3) (iii). Court said the expression "documents" is a wide expression which would certainly include resolution plans. The judgment also clarified that the RP can take an undertaking from the erstwhile director to maintain confidentiality of the information. Therefore, in view of this judgement of Supreme Court, it can be concluded that the contention of the RP with respect to sharing of the resolution plan only with the members of CoC having voting rights is incorrect.