Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – ss. 30(2) and 31 – Contours of the jurisdiction of Adjudicating Authority in dealing with a resolution plan – Held: The Adjudicating Authority has limited jurisdiction in the matter of approval of a resolution plan, which is well-defined and circumscribed by ss.30(2) and 31 of the Code – In the adjudicatory process concerning a resolution plan under IBC, there is no scope for interference with the commercial aspects of the decision of the Committee of Creditors (CoC); and there is no scope for substituting any commercial term of the resolution plan approved by Committee of Creditors – If, within its limited jurisdiction, the Adjudicating Authority finds any shortcoming in the resolution plan vis-à-vis the specified parameters, it would only send the resolution plan back to the Committee of Creditors, for re- submission after satisfying the parameters delineated by the Code and exposited by the Supreme Court. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Resolution plan – Activities of the corporate debtor had impact on a large number of persons/ entities, including buyers of flats/apartments in its real estate development projects – Whether approval of the resolution plan of NBCC was vitiated because of simultaneous voting over two resolution plans in the Committee of Creditors – Held: The process of simultaneous voting over two plans for electing one of them could not be faulted in the present case; and approval of the resolution plan of NBCC was not vitiated because of simultaneous consideration and voting over two resolution plans by the Committee of Creditors. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Resolution plan – Activities of the corporate debtor had impact on a large number of persons/ entities, including buyers of flats/apartments in its real estate development projects – Whether, after approval of the resolution plan of NBCC by the Committee of Creditors, where homebuyers as a class assented to the plan, any individual homebuyer or any association of homebuyers could maintain a challenge to the resolution plan and could be treated as a dissenting financial creditor or an aggrieved person – Whether any housing project which was completed or nearing completion ought to be kept out of the purview of the resolution plan – Held: On facts, the homebuyers as a class having assented to the resolution plan of NBCC, any individual homebuyer or any association of homebuyers cannot maintain a challenge to the resolution plan and cannot be treated as a dissenting financial creditor or an aggrieved person; and when the resolution plan comprehensively deals with all the assets and liabilities of the corporate debtor, no housing project of the corporate debtor could be segregated merely for the reason that same was completed or nearing completion.