Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2023) 03 NCLT CK 3718

Manoj Jain Prop. Maxwell India vs Romesh Power Products Pvt. Ltd.

National Company Law Tribunal, Jaipur Bench (Rajasthan) · Decided on 31 March 2023

HON’BLE JUDGES
Prasanta Kumar Mohanty, Technical Member · Deep Chandra Joshi, Judicial Member
CASE NUMBER
IA No. 272/JPR/2022, IA No. 145/JPR/2023, IA No. 161/JPR/2023, CP No. (IB)- 23/9/JPR/2020

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 319 words

This is an application under Section 12A of the IBC, 2016 read with Regulation 30A (1) of CIRP Regulations, 2016 has been filed by the Bank of Maharashtra.

Heard Mr. Satyendra Prasad Khorania, RP present in person. Mr. Akshat Kulshrestha, Adv. along with Mr. Roopendra Singh, Law Officer for the Bank of Maharashtra. It is stated that the Resolution Professional published Form- G for invitation of Resolution Plan on 26.05.2022, which was published in newspapers (one English and one Hindi). However, no expression of interest was received by the RP from any of the prospective Resolution Applicant. On 18.06.2022, the agenda for extension of the CIRP period was rejected by the CoC. After the rejection of the resolution for extension, the RP put an agenda for liquidation of the Corporate Debtor. However, the CoC did not vote on the resolution for liquidation. CoC does not want to liquidate the Corporate Debtor.

In view of the above facts and circumstances, it was decided by the Members of CoC to withdraw the CIRP of the Corporate Debtor in the present case.

On the previous date of hearing, it was submitted by Mr. Satyendra Prasad Khorania, RP that Erstwhile RP was having key of rented premises and some of the records of the Corporate Debtor is lying in the rented premises. It is stated by the Mr. Satyendra Prasad Khorania, RP that he has taken key from the erstwhile RP and possession of the record with regard to Corporate Debtor has also been taken. If record of the Corporate Debtor is not required in any proceedings before Court or Government agency the same may be handed over to the Financial Creditor i.e., Bank of Maharashtra.

In view of the above, IA No. 145/JPR/2023 is allowed and CP No. (IB)-23/9/JPR/2020 in which CIRP was initiated is dismissed as withdrawn and CIRP is terminated. All pending IAs in this matter stand disposed of accordingly.