Venugopal Dhoot has moved the Court of Appeals of the National Company Law against the order approving the offer of mining tycoon Anil Agarwal for Videocon Industries Ltd.
Dhoot, a former promoter of Videocon Group, is seeking the repeal of a recovery plan approved by the National Company Rights Court in June, and instructs a board of creditors to consider his recovery plan filed under Section 12A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Act proposing a zero hairstyle.
Rehabilitation process in Videocon Industries Ltd. encountered unexpected turbulence after NCLAT suspended implementation of the Agarwal-owned Volcan Group recovery plan. Bankers now want to negotiate a repayment plan proposed by the buyer.
The intervention of the appellate court may encourage the board creditors to reconsider their point of view about the offer Volcan arm Twin Star Technologies Ltd. for Videocon.
In July, following objections raised by the Bank of Maharashtra and IFCI Ltd., the Court of Appeals overturned a June 8 decision by the Mumbai council of the NCLT to approve the offer. Twin Star has agreed to pay HRK 2,900 million against more than HRK 61,000 million in debts owed to financial creditors – a repayment rate of less than 5%.
Dhoot claimed in his petition that according to the December order of NCLT Mumbai, the foreign oil assets were bought by the Videocon Group through its subsidiaries.
He said the value of the liquidation of his foreign oil and gas assets is not less than 15,000 kuna, and the rehabilitation expert or the board of creditors does not have the authority to sell oil assets and durable goods separately.
“If the remediation expert had sold durable oils and consumer traces together, the resolution expert would have had a minimum of HRK 25,000 under a loan of HRK 49,000 (29,000 rubles of consumer durable goods VIL and HRK 20,000 million of oil assets),” Dhoot said in a statement, adding that the recovery would be about 50%.
Dhoot offered to repay the bank loans in the amount of HRK 30,000 and take over the company according to the Section 12A proposal, but since the company went to NCLT, the board of creditors rejected his proposal.