Infinitas Energy Liquidation: Failed Resolution Plans Lead to Company Liquidation Order

The Corporate Debtor, M/s. Infinitas Energy Solutions Pvt. Ltd., underwent liquidation proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Despite efforts including multiple CoC meetings, plan revisions, and judicial directions for revised offers, all Resolution Plans were rejected by the CoCs. Consequently, the Authority issued a detailed Liquidation Order appointing the Resolution Professional as the Company Liquidator. The case exemplified the exhaustive attempts at resolution before resorting to liquidation due to the failure to approve viable Resolution Plans within the specified timeframe.

---

---

Issues Involved:
Liquidation of Corporate Debtor under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

Detailed Analysis:
1. Background: The case involved the liquidation of a Corporate Debtor, M/s. Infinitas Energy Solutions Pvt. Ltd., under Section 33 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (I&B Code, 2016). The process started with the admission of a petition by a Financial Creditor, Indian Bank, leading to the appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP).

2. Resolution Process: The IRP managed the Corporate Debtor and initiated the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The CoCs decided to extend the CIRP period, invited Expression of Interest (EoI) for Resolution Plans, appointed valuers and forensic auditors, and received Resolution Plans from potential Resolution Applicants.

3. Revised Offers and CoC Meetings: After deliberations, revised offers were submitted by Resolution Applicants, but the CoCs found no significant changes in the plans. Extension requests for CIRP period were made due to court orders suspending proceedings, leading to multiple meetings and voting on Resolution Plans.

4. Rejection of Resolution Plans: Despite multiple attempts, the CoCs rejected all Resolution Plans due to concerns about creditor haircuts, low offers compared to previous settlements, financial statements, and questionable transactions, leading to the decision of liquidation.

5. Judicial Directions: The Resolution Professional was directed to convene meetings with Resolution Applicants for plan revisions. However, even after submitting revised plans, the CoCs unanimously rejected the offers, resulting in the liquidation order by the Authority under Section 33 of the I&B Code, 2016.

6. Liquidation Order: The Authority passed a detailed Liquidation Order appointing the Resolution Professional as the Company Liquidator, ceasing the moratorium, transferring powers to the Liquidator, and outlining procedures for the liquidation process, including fee entitlement, communication of the order, and compliance requirements.

7. Conclusion: The case highlighted the exhaustive process of attempting resolution through multiple meetings, plan revisions, and CoC deliberations before ultimately resorting to liquidation due to the failure to approve viable Resolution Plans within the stipulated time frame under the I&B Code, 2016.

---