# In the matter of Shrinivas Spintex Pvt. Ltd. vs. Hinganghat Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2024-02-22. Citation: TCN-2024-NCLAT-00623. The case involves an appeal against an order dated 08.02.2024 passed by the Adjudicating…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 22 Feb 2024
- **Citation:** TCN-2024-NCLAT-00623
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/shrinivas-spintex-pvt-ltd-vs-hinganghat-infrastructure-pvt-ltd-ors-9d545179

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against an order dated 08.02.2024 passed by the Adjudicating Authority in a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The Appellant and Respondent No. 1 both submitted resolution plans as Resolution Applicants. The Resolution Professional opened the resolution plans. Respondent No. 1 filed an application seeking to reverse the process followed for submission of final resolution plans and allow all Resolution Applicants to negotiate with the CoC. The Adjudicating Authority partly allowed the application.

## Facts

Shrinivas Spintex Pvt. Ltd. (Appellant) and Hinganghat Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. (Respondents) are parties in a CIRP. Both the Appellant and Respondent No. 1 submitted resolution plans as Resolution Applicants. The Resolution Professional opened the resolution plans. Respondent No. 1 filed an application seeking to reverse the process followed for submission of final resolution plans and allow all Resolution Applicants to negotiate with the CoC. The Adjudicating Authority partly allowed the application. The Appellant argues that the application filed by Respondent No. 1 was allowed without notice to other Resolution Applicants, and only the Resolution Professional was heard. The Appellant contends that the Resolution Plan should be opened by the Resolution

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority's order, which partly allowed the application filed by …

**Ratio:** The ratio is based on the interpretation of Section 30(2) of the Insolvency and

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the Adjudicating Authority's order was unsustainable because it

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation involves understanding the procedural requirements for the

…

**Application:** The ratio and reasoning were applied to the specific facts of the case, where

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Yogesh K…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Shrinivas Spintex…
- **Respondents:** Hinganghat…

## Timeline

- **2024-01-03 — Voting Com…**: Voting on the…
- **2024-02-02 — Application…**: Respondent No. 1 filed…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 30 — Submission of resolution plan](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-30)

---

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/shrinivas-spintex-pvt-ltd-vs-hinganghat-infrastructure-pvt-ltd-ors-9d545179