Liquidation under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code follows when no resolution plan emerges and creditors approve winding up.

Liquidation under Section 33(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was justified because no resolution plan was received within the CIRP period, the Committee of Creditors found no realistic chance of revival, and it unanimously approved liquidation with 100% voting. The Tribunal therefore ordered liquidation of the corporate debtor and appointed the resolution professional as liquidator. The order also noted the statutory consequences of liquidation, including cessation of moratorium and vesting of powers in the liquidator.

---

---

Issues: Whether the corporate debtor was liable to be put into liquidation under Section 33(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and whether the resolution professional could be appointed as liquidator.

Analysis: The resolution process had been commenced after admission of the insolvency petition, claims were invited, and the Committee of Creditors was constituted. The Committee of Creditors subsequently considered the expressions of interest received, found that they did not satisfy the criteria, and unanimously resolved that there was no chance of revival of the business. It also approved liquidation with 100% voting and recommended appointment of the resolution professional as liquidator. As no resolution plan had been received within the permitted period of the corporate insolvency resolution process, the statutory basis for liquidation stood satisfied. The order also follows the consequences prescribed by the Code for liquidation, including cessation of moratorium and vesting of powers in the liquidator.

Conclusion: Liquidation of the corporate debtor was ordered and the resolution professional was appointed as liquidator.

---