2020 (12) TMI 491 - Tri - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Tribunal Orders Liquidation of Corporate Debtor post CIRP due to Lack of Viable Plan

AUTONIX LIGHTING INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED Versus MOSER BAER ELECTRONICS LIMITED And HEMANT SHARMA Versus MOSER BAER ELECTRONIC LIMITED

The Tribunal ordered the liquidation of the corporate debtor after the expiration of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) period, as no ... Liquidation of the corporate debtor - CIRP of 270 days in the present matter has been expired and due to non-receipt of any Resolution Plan within the period of CIRP of 270 days, hence this application has been filed under the provisions of section 33 of IBC, 2016 - HELD THAT:- The Resolution Professional represents that valuation report as required to be obtained under the provisions of IBC, 2016 from the registered valuer in relation to the fair value of the assets of the corporate debtor as well as its liquidation value has been duly done. The fair value of assets and liquidation value as per date 20.07.2020 is ₹ 384.88 (in lakhs) and ₹ 105.40 (in lakhs) respectively. This Tribunal in the circumstances taking into consideration the provisions of law as well as on facts hereby orders for liquidation of the corporate debtor and in the circumstances the corporate debtor stands liquidated and the incidence of liquidation to follow, on and from the date of this order in terms of the provisions of IBC, 2016 and more particularly as given in Chapter – III of IBC, 2016 and also in terms of Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2017 - application allowed. Issues:Liquidation order under Section 33(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for a corporate debtor.Analysis:1. The Resolution Professional filed an application for the liquidation of the corporate debtor under Section 33(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, due to the non-receipt of any resolution plan within the stipulated time frame.2. The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) commenced with the admission of the application by the Adjudicating Authority and the appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional. Despite efforts to invite expression of interest from prospective Resolution Applicants, no viable resolution plan was received within the specified timelines.3. The Resolution Professional sought an extension of the CIRP period by another 90 days, which was approved by the CoC due to the absence of any resolution plan. Subsequent attempts to attract Resolution Applicants through publications also failed to yield any positive response.4. Following the expiration of the CIRP period and the non-receipt of any resolution plan, the CoC unanimously passed a resolution to initiate the liquidation process of the corporate debtor with 100% of votes.5. The Tribunal, considering the provisions of the law and the facts of the case, ordered the liquidation of the corporate debtor. The fair value of assets and liquidation value were duly assessed by a registered valuer, and the liquidation process was directed to commence as per the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code and relevant regulations.6. The Tribunal appointed the Resolution Professional as the Liquidator and issued directions for the necessary public announcements, communications to regulatory authorities, cessation of the moratorium, and initiation of the liquidation process in compliance with the applicable laws and regulations.7. The Liquidator was mandated to submit a Preliminary Report to the Adjudicating Authority within the specified timeline, and the order was deemed a notice of discharge to the officers, employees, and workmen of the corporate debtor as per the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.8. The Tribunal directed the issuance of copies of the order to the operational creditor, corporate debtor, and the Liquidator for further actions, effectively concluding the matter with the disposal of the filed application.