When a resolution plan is approved, it binds everyone. Creditors who receive little or nothing under it may find their claims extinguished. That is why the law gives a narrow but real opportunity to object: before the NCLT when the plan comes up for approval, and before the NCLAT in appeal.
The grounds are limited. The tribunals respect the commercial wisdom of the committee of creditors, so arguing that the plan is "too low" rarely succeeds. What succeeds are objections that the plan breaks the law: it pays operational creditors less than the statutory minimum, it treats dissenting creditors unlawfully, it was approved through a material irregularity, the bidder is ineligible, or it ignores a claim the resolution professional wrongly rejected. This page explains how to frame an objection that the tribunal will hear.
हिंदी में सारांश
अगर रेज़ोलà¥à¤¯à¥‚शन पà¥à¤²à¤¾à¤¨ आपके दावे को नज़रअंदाज़ करता है या कानून के खिलाफ है, तो आप NCLT में पà¥à¤²à¤¾à¤¨ की मंज़ूरी के समय आपतà¥à¤¤à¤¿ कर सकते हैं और मंज़ूरी के बाद 30 दिनों में (अधिकतम 15 दिन और) NCLAT में अपील कर सकते हैं। केवल "रकम कम है" कहना काफी नहीं — ठोस कानूनी आधार चाहिà¤, जैसे ऑपरेशनल कà¥à¤°à¥‡à¤¡à¤¿à¤Ÿà¤°à¥à¤¸ को नà¥à¤¯à¥‚नतम राशि न देना, असहमत लेनदारों के साथ गलत वà¥à¤¯à¤µà¤¹à¤¾à¤°, बोलीदाता की अयोगà¥à¤¯à¤¤à¤¾, या पà¥à¤°à¤•à¥à¤°à¤¿à¤¯à¤¾ में गंà¤à¥€à¤° अनियमितता।
Is this your situation?
- A resolution plan has been approved by the committee and you received nothing or very little
- You are an operational creditor and the plan pays you less than the liquidation value
- You are a financial creditor who voted against the plan
- You are a homebuyer and the plan changes your flat, price or possession date unfairly
- Your claim was rejected by the resolution professional and the plan ignores it
- You believe the winning bidder is ineligible under Section 29A
- The NCLT approved the plan and the 30-day appeal window is running
Grounds that can succeed
Section 61(3) of the Code lists the grounds on which an appeal against approval of a plan can be brought. Objections before the NCLT follow the same logic.
Contravention of law
The plan breaks a provision of law in force, for example by dealing with assets the company does not own, or by ignoring a mandatory regulatory requirement.
Material irregularity by the professional
The resolution professional committed a material irregularity in running the process, such as unfair exclusion of a bidder or a flawed voting process.
Operational creditors short-changed
The plan does not provide operational creditors at least the higher of their liquidation value or what they would receive under the Section 53 waterfall applied to the plan amount.
Process costs not provided
The insolvency resolution process costs are not provided for in priority.
Other Section 30(2) requirements
The plan fails any other mandatory requirement, including the 2026 rule that dissenting financial creditors receive at least the lower of their liquidation value or their waterfall share of the plan value.
Ineligible bidder
The resolution applicant is barred under Section 29A, directly or through a connected person.
Grounds that usually fail
In Committee of Creditors of Essar Steel v Satish Kumar Gupta (2019) and several decisions since, the Supreme Court has held that the committee's commercial decisions, including how much each class receives within the legal minimums, are not open to judicial review on merits. Objections that rarely succeed include:
- the plan value is lower than the company's "real" worth;
- another bidder would have paid more, if that bidder did not submit a compliant plan in time;
- financial creditors get a higher percentage than operational creditors, where the plan still meets the statutory minimum;
- the objector would have preferred liquidation.
That said, the tribunals do intervene where a class is treated with clear discrimination without basis, or where the process was unfair. Each objection needs to be framed carefully within the legal grounds.
Homebuyers and resolution plans
Changes to your unit
Plans sometimes reallocate units, change specifications or revise possession dates. Changes must be dealt with fairly and transparently in the plan.
Demands for extra payment
Plans may require homebuyers to pay the balance price, sometimes with escalation. Unjustified additional demands can be challenged.
Refund-seekers
Buyers who want refunds rather than units are often offered much less. Whether the treatment is lawful depends on the plan and the class vote.
Your representative's vote
Homebuyers vote through an authorised representative. If the representative did not follow the class's voting, or the vote was flawed, that can be raised.
How to object
Get the plan's treatment of your claim
Ask the resolution professional, in writing, how your claim is treated in the approved plan. Homebuyers and operational creditors are entitled to know what they will receive.
Compare with the legal minimum
For operational creditors, we compare the payout with the liquidation value and the waterfall figure. For dissenting financial creditors, we apply the 2026 rule. This comparison is often the strongest objection.
File an objection before the NCLT
When the professional files the plan for approval, an application raising specific legal objections can be filed. The NCLT must approve or reject the plan within 30 days, so objections must be filed promptly.
Appeal to the NCLAT if approved
An appeal against approval must be filed within 30 days of the order, with at most 15 more days for sufficient cause. The NCLAT is now required to decide IBC appeals within three months. See NCLAT appeal (IBC).
Seek interim protection where necessary
If implementation would make the appeal pointless, for example by distributing all funds, we seek interim directions. The NCLAT is often reluctant to stay implementation, so the case must be strong.
Supreme Court on questions of law
A further appeal lies to the Supreme Court within 45 days on a question of law. See Supreme Court appeal.
Time and typical cost
Fees are agreed in writing for each stage and do not depend on the outcome.
| Stage | Usual time | What it involves |
|---|---|---|
| Review of the plan and your claim | 3 to 7 days | Comparison with legal minimums |
| Objection before NCLT | Before approval; NCLT decides within 30 days | Application, hearing |
| Appeal to NCLAT | Within 30 days of approval (+15 at most) | Appeal fee, drafting, hearings; decision due within 3 months |
| Supreme Court | Within 45 days (+15 at most) | Civil appeal on questions of law |
Documents you will need
Your claim
- Claim form filed and the professional's decision on it
- Supporting documents for the claim
- Correspondence with the professional
The plan
- Approved plan or its summary of treatment
- Committee minutes approving it
- Liquidation value information, if available
The order
- NCLT order approving the plan (with date)
- Pleadings filed before the NCLT
An operational creditor below the minimum
Here's a made-up example. An engineering contractor with an admitted claim of Rs 2.4 crore was offered Rs 6 lakh under an approved plan for a Noida manufacturing company. The contractor asked whether this could be challenged.
We obtained the liquidation value information from the resolution professional's filings and found that operational creditors as a group would have received more in liquidation than the plan provided. The plan therefore fell below the statutory minimum. We filed an objection before NCLT Allahabad. The committee was given an opportunity to cure the defect, and a revised distribution increasing payments to operational creditors was approved.
Mistakes objectors make
- Arguing price instead of law: "the plan is too low" rarely succeeds. Show how the plan breaches Section 30(2) or the law.
- Waiting for the NCLT order before acting: objections raised before approval are often heard more fully than appeals filed after.
- Missing the appeal deadline: an appeal against approval must be filed within 30 days, with a maximum of 15 more days for sufficient cause.
- No numbers: an objection that operational creditors are short-changed needs figures: liquidation value, waterfall amount and the plan's payout.
- Not challenging claim rejection first: if your claim was wrongly rejected, challenge that decision promptly; otherwise the plan may treat you as having no claim.
- Seeking a stay without a strong case: tribunals hesitate to halt implementation. Ask for targeted relief, such as setting aside an amount, where possible.
Employees, workmen and government authorities
Employees and workmen have priority in liquidation, and resolution plans are expected to deal fairly with their dues. Where a plan offers workmen far less than their liquidation entitlement, or ignores provident fund and gratuity dues that are not part of the company's assets, objections have succeeded in several cases. Government authorities, such as tax departments, sometimes object that their dues have been reduced. After the 2026 amendment, a security interest arising only by operation of law does not make the government a secured creditor, which affects how such objections are assessed. Each category of objector has its own legal framework, and we frame the objection accordingly.
Key terms in plain words
| Term | What it means |
|---|---|
| Liquidation value | The estimated amount realisable if the company's assets were sold in liquidation |
| Section 53 waterfall | The order of priority for paying creditors in liquidation |
| Dissenting financial creditor | A financial creditor who voted against the plan |
| Material irregularity | A significant error in how the resolution professional ran the process |
| Clean slate | The rule that claims not in the approved plan are extinguished |
Checklist before objecting
- Get the approved plan, or at least the parts that affect you
- Get the CoC minutes and voting results
- Compare your treatment with others in your class
- Check whether you received at least liquidation value (for dissenting financial creditors)
- Check whether operational creditors received at least what Section 30(2)(b) requires
- Note the date of approval and the date the NCLT will hear the plan
- Collect evidence of any procedural defect (missing notice, wrong voting share)
- Decide whether to object before NCLT or wait to appeal
What courts will not review
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line. In K. Sashidhar (2019) and Essar Steel (2019), it held that the CoC's commercial wisdom, including how much to pay each class and whether to accept a plan, is not open to judicial review. The NCLT checks whether the plan meets the requirements of Section 30(2): payment of CIRP costs, the minimum amounts to operational and dissenting financial creditors, management of the business after approval, implementation and supervision, and compliance with law.
An objection that simply says "we should have received more" is unlikely to succeed. An objection that shows the plan breaches the law, or that the process was unfair to one creditor, has a much better chance. In Jaypee Kensington (2021), the Supreme Court also considered the treatment of dissenting creditors and homebuyers. We review your position honestly before advising you to object. See resolution plans.
A creditor left out of the information memorandum
Here's a made-up example. A Delhi equipment lessor's claim was admitted by the resolution professional, but it was missing from the information memorandum sent to resolution applicants. The plan made no provision for it at all.
We objected before the NCLT, showing that the claim had been admitted and that the plan failed to deal with it. The NCLT sent the plan back to the CoC for reconsideration of the lessor's claim, and the revised plan included a payment to the lessor in line with other operational creditors.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I object to a resolution plan just because the amount is low?
Usually not. The committee's commercial decisions are respected. You need a legal ground, such as payment below the statutory minimum or an ineligible bidder.
What is the minimum an operational creditor must receive?
The higher of what they would get in liquidation and what they would get if the plan amount were distributed under the Section 53 waterfall.
I voted against the plan. What must I receive?
After the 2026 amendment, a dissenting financial creditor must receive at least the lower of its liquidation value or its share under the waterfall applied to the plan value.
How long do I have to appeal against approval?
Thirty days from the NCLT's order, with at most 15 more days for sufficient cause. No further delay can be condoned.
Can the NCLAT stop the plan from being implemented?
It can grant interim relief, but is cautious, because delay harms everyone. A strong legal case is needed.
My claim was rejected by the professional. Can I still object?
Yes. You can challenge the rejection and argue that the plan wrongly ignores your claim. Act quickly, before approval if possible.
Is there a further appeal after the NCLAT?
Yes, to the Supreme Court on a question of law, within 45 days.
How are your fees decided?
By the stage and complexity, agreed in writing. They do not depend on the result.
Unhappy With a Resolution Plan?
Send us the plan's treatment of your claim and the approval order, if passed. We will tell you whether a legal objection is available and how much time you have.
This page gives general information about the law as it stood when it was last reviewed. It is not legal advice on your case and does not promise any result. IBC rules and NCLT procedures change often, so outcomes depend on your own documents, dates and facts.
Need help with Objecting to an Unfair Resolution Plan?
Send us the notice, the petition or the order. We will tell you where you stand, which bench hears it and the date the next step is due, in plain words.
