Allowed

In the matter of Shrikrupalu Steels Pvt. Ltd. Ia (Ib) No. ,278,279,292 & 346-CB-2022, Appeal (Ibc) No. 1-CB-2022 in Cp (lB) No. 133-CTB-2019

NCLT13 Dec 2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Company Law Tribunal allowed an application by the Interim Resolution Professional of Shrikrupalu Steels Pvt. Ltd. to withdraw the Winding Up Petition admitted under Section 9 of the IBC, as dues to the IRP were not paid. Consequently, the CIRP was terminated, moratorium cancelled, and the corporate debtor restored to its original position.

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal of the CIRP allowed; CIRP terminated, moratorium cancelled, IRP discharged, books of account handed over to the Board of Directors, corporate debtor restored to original position.

In the matter of Shrikrupalu Steels Pvt. Ltd. Ia (Ib)… — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | NCLT (2022)

¶1

202

¶2

NATIONAI., COMPANY LAW TRIBIJNAL ntrffildftstfYorul

¶3

CUTTACK BENCH

¶4

@tfsfto

¶5

ORDER SHEET OF THE HEARING ON 13th DECEMBER,2022,I0:30 A.M.

¶6

CP (lB) No. 133/CT812019, Appeal (IBC) No. 1/CB/2022,1A (IB) No. 2781C812022 IA (IB) No. 279lCBl2022,IA (IB) No. 292lCBl2022,IA (IB) No. 346lCB12022

¶7

Present: L. Hon'ble Member (Judicial), Shri P. Mohan Raj 2. Hon'ble Member (Technical), Shri Satya Ranjan Prasad

¶8

Narne o1'the Company Imperial Refractories -Vs- Shrikrupalu Steels Pvt. Ltd. LJnder Section 9IBC

¶9

F'or Petitioner (s)

¶10

Mr. B. Panigrahi, Adv. Mr. Sabyasachi Panda, Adv. (IRP)

¶11

For ltespondent (s) Mr. S. K. Acharya. Adv. Mr. Subham Agrawal, Adv. Mr. A. Agarwal, Adv, Mr. J. Sahoo, Adv. Mr. J. Joshi, Adv.

¶12

ORDER

¶13

lA^(IB) No. 346lCB/2022:

¶14

Both sides counsel and counsel fbr IRP present. The present application has been filed by the Interim Resolution Professional of Shrikrupalu Steels Pvt. Ltd. (Corporate Debtor) seeking permission for withdrawal of application CP. (IB) No. 1331CT812019, the petition was admitted by this Adjudicating ALrthority by an order dated 02,05,2022 for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Ilesolution Process under Section 9 of Insolvency and []ankruptcy Code, 2016. After adrnission ol the petition, the COC has not been constituted so far. Fufiher, [t is submitted that the petitioner has cornplied all requirements under Regulation, hence this Adjudicating Authority is inclined to approve the withdrawal application as provided under Regulation 30A (6). The Resolution Professional Counsel present and said there is no due.^'fotal expenses including fee of IRP is paid by the Petitioner/Operational Creditor. In these circumstances this withdrawal petition is allowed in consequence of the CIRP initiated against the Corporate Debtor shall stand terminated. The Board of directors of the Page I ol'2. <- gA )-

¶15

Vishal (Steno)

¶16

Corporate Debtor is restored to its original position.^'l-l-re IRP is hereby directed to hand over the books of account to the hands of restored Board of Directors and the IRP is hereby shall stand discharged. I'he moratoriurn which carle into eflect in consequence of the order of admission dated 02.05.2022 is stand cancelled. The Corporate Debtor is relieved frorn the rigorous clutches of all the action initiated in this proceeding.

¶17

-4
-,,.
c_ _1 ,"
(, CA.
Satya X""j rasad
Mennte echnical)

¶18

-TTIohan Raj Member (Judicial)

¶19

Page 2 ol2.

¶20

Vishal (Steno)

In the matter of Shrikrupalu Steels Pvt. Ltd. Ia (Ib) No. ,278,279,292 & 346-CB-2022, Appeal (Ibc) No. 1-CB-2022 in Cp (lB) No. 133-CTB-2019

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

In the matter of Shrikrupalu Steels Pvt. Ltd. Ia (Ib) No. ,278,279,292 & 346-CB-2022, Appeal (Ibc) No. 1-CB-2022 in Cp (lB) No. 133-CTB-2019

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases