# In the matter of Maharashtra Seamless Ltd. Vs. K.K. Lakshminarayana & Ors. CA(AT)(Ins)No. 637 of 2018

> NCLAT judgment dated 2018-11-12. Citation: TCN-2018-NCLAT-00065. The appeal was preferred by Maharashtra Seamless Ltd. against the order dated 28th September,…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 12 Nov 2018
- **Citation:** TCN-2018-NCLAT-00065
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/maharashtra-seamless-ltd-vs-kk-lakshminarayana-ors-ca-9c500f36

## Summary

### Background

The appeal was preferred by Maharashtra Seamless Ltd. against the order dated 28th September, 2018, passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad. The Adjudicating Authority directed to re-determine the Liquidation Value before considering the Resolution Plan filed by MSL. The NCLAT observed that the Adjudicating Authority can exclude certain periods for the purpose of counting the total period of CIRP if circumstances justify such exclusion. The Resolution Plan of MSL was ordered to be placed before the CoC for consideration after redetermination of Liquidation Value. The Appellate Tribunal noted that there was no occasion for the Adjudicating Authority to pass any order in the Interlocutory Application for

…

## Facts

Maharashtra Seamless Ltd. (MSL) filed an appeal against an order by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Hyderabad Bench, dated September 28, 2018. The NCLT had directed the re-determination of the liquidation value of MSL before considering its resolution plan. The NCLAT considered whether the NCLT was correct in ordering the re-determination of the liquidation value. The NCLAT also considered the circumstances under which certain periods can be excluded for the purpose of counting the total period of CIRP. The Resolution Professional was ordered to convene a meeting of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) to comply with the directions. The NCLAT observed that there was no occasion for the Adjudicating Authority to pass any order in the Interlocutory Application for

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority was correct in directing the re-determination of the liquidation …

**Ratio:** The Adjudicating Authority has the power to direct the re-determination of the

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLAT observed that the Adjudicating Authority can exclude certain periods for the

…

**Interpretation:** Section 30(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, requires the

…

**Application:** In this case, the Adjudicating Authority directed the re-determination of the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** S.J. Mukhop…; Bansi Lal…
- **Appellants:** Maharashtra…
- **Respondents:** K. K. Lakshminaray…

## Timeline

- **2018-09-28 — Order by Adjudicating…**: The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad…
- **2018-11-12 — Appeal Pre…**: Maharashtra Seamless Ltd. preferred an appeal against the order of the Adjudicating…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 31 — Approval of resolution plan](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-31)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/maharashtra-seamless-ltd-vs-kk-lakshminarayana-ors-ca-9c500f36