TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Early Dissolution of Corporate Debtor Approved Under Insolvency Code Section 54</h1> <h3>Gromax India Versus S.B.O. Export Private Limited</h3> Gromax India Versus S.B.O. Export Private Limited - TMI Issues:Application for early dissolution of the corporate debtor under Section 54(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.Analysis:1. The application was filed by the liquidator of the Corporate Debtor for early dissolution under Section 54(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and Regulation 45(3) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016.2. The case originated from an application under section 9 of the IBC, 2016, filed by an operational creditor against the Corporate Debtor, leading to the initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). Subsequently, a liquidator was appointed for the Corporate Debtor after the initiation of the liquidation process.3. Following the initiation of the liquidation process, the liquidator made public announcements to call for stakeholder claims, verified the received claims, and submitted necessary reports and memorandums as per the regulations.4. Due to insufficient funds and zero realizable value of assets, the liquidator failed to appoint a registered valuer for asset valuation within the required timeline after the initiation of liquidation.5. The proposed timeline for liquidation completion was one year from the liquidation commencement date; however, certain pending matters delayed the process beyond the proposed timeline.6. With no assets except a minimal amount in a bank account, the liquidator filed an application for the dissolution of the Corporate Debtor, supported by the final report and compliance certificate served to relevant authorities.7. The Adjudicating Authority considered the application for dissolution in light of Section 54 of the Code and Regulation 14 of the Liquidation Process Regulations, noting the insufficiency of realizable properties to cover liquidation costs and the absence of a stakeholders committee, leading to the decision to dissolve the Corporate Debtor.8. The bench declined a specific prayer clause seeking directions for payment of fees to IBBI, as there was no legal provision for such directions, and admitted the liquidator's application for dissolution of the Corporate Debtor.
TaxTMI 