Factual Background 

In the instant case of Central Board of Trustees v. Shri Kumar Rajan an instance where the Resolution Plan was approved without the whole claim, including Provident Fund and Gratuity Dues, being admitted. The Resolution Plan was authorised by the Adjudicating Authority in an order dated February 29, 2021, as proposed by the Resolution Professional. The RP told the appellant that his claim was only granted to the amount of 35.13% of the total admitted claim of Rs. 30,46,31,880/- in an email dated 09-02-2021. Affirming the Resolution Plan and allowing the appellant’s claim to the extent of 35.13%, the impugned judgement dated 29-02-2021 infuriated the appellant, who filed the current appeal before the NCLAT to challenge it.

Issue 

Were the appellant’s Provident Fund and Gratuity obligation to be fully satisfied?

Analysis of Tribunal order 

The Resolution Plan must include both the Provident Fund and the Gratuity Fund, both of which must be paid in full, according to a directive from a division bench made up of Justice M. Venugopal and Justice Ms Shreesha Merla, a technical member of the NCLAT

According to the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act of 1952 and the Payment of Gratuity Act of 1972, respectively, both the Provident Fund and the Gratuity Fund must be paid in full. The NCLAT granted the current appeal and ordered that these sums be included in the Resolution Plan.

CASE NAME – Central Board of Trustees v. Shri Kumar Rajan, Comp App (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 268/2021