2. As noted above, the Division Bench has noted various decisions
and has distinguished the same simply observing that the point considered
therein was on slightly different questions.
3. Is that so?
4. The first decision noted by the Division Bench is 1996 (39) DRJ
380 Sarin International Pvt.Ltd. vs. AAIFR. In said case, the scheme for
rehabilitation pertained to revival of the company M/s Stallion Shox Ltd.
It was promoted by one Ajeet Sarin who had also promoted Sarin
International Pvt. Ltd. The sanction scheme not only reduced the share
capital of the existing shareholders but also waived, wholly or in part, the
debts due of unsecured creditors without their consent. As an unsecured
W.P.(C) No.832/2016 Page 5 of 16
creditor Sarin International Pvt. Ltd. was aggrieved by the reduction of its
dues as an unsecured creditor. The Division Bench upheld the scheme;
and qua the unsecured creditors observed, in para 11, as under:-
Source: Indian Kanoon