A bank holding 30% of the voting share in the committee of creditors of XYZ Ltd voted against a resolution plan. The plan was nonetheless approved by creditors holding 70% of the voting share and was sanctioned by the NCLT under Section 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The bank now refuses to accept the reduced repayment schedule. Which statement is correct?

Under section 31(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, a resolution plan approved by the committee of creditors with the requisite majority and sanctioned by the National Company Law Tribunal is binding on the corporate debtor, its creditors, guarantors and every other stakeholder, including those who dissented. Section 30(4) requires only sixty-six per cent approval, and here seventy per cent approved the plan, so the statutory majority was satisfied. A dissenting financial creditor cannot resile from the plan or pursue separate recovery, because the sanctioned plan becomes the exclusive and enforceable framework of rights and obligations and the scheme of the Code precludes parallel enforcement. Options requiring the bank's consent, voting in favour, or preservation of the original principal are therefore incorrect.