# In the matter of Vintron Communication Pvt. Ltd. (IB) 1492 (ND)-2019

> NCLT judgment dated 2020-06-08. Citation: TCN-2020-NCLT-01222. The case involves an application filed by the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) under…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 8 Jun 2020
- **Citation:** TCN-2020-NCLT-01222
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-chandigarh/vintron-communication-pvt-ltd-ib-1492-nd-2019-1a029807

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an application filed by the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) seeking an order for the winding up/liquidation of the Corporate Debtor, Vintron Communications Pvt. Ltd. The initial application under Section 7 of the IBC was filed by Sudha Rani Tayal, the financial creditor, which was admitted on 15.10.2019, and Mr. Sandeep Chandna was appointed as IRP. A public announcement was made as per Section 15 of the IBC, and claims were received from financial creditors. However, the Committee of Creditors (CoC) could not be effectively convened because the financial creditor, Sudha Rani Tayal, is the mother of the Corporate Debtor, creating a conflict of interest. The Corporate Debtor has been

…

## Facts

Sudha Rani Tayal, the financial creditor, filed an application under Section 7 of the IBC against Vintron Communications Pvt. Ltd., the corporate debtor. The application was admitted on 15.10.2019, and Sandeep Chandna was appointed as the IRP. A public announcement was made, and claims were received from financial creditors. The first meeting of the CoC was convened on 14.11.2019, during which Sudha Rani Tayal disclosed that she was a related party (mother of the Corporate Debtor). The auditors informed the IRP that the corporate debtor had not made payments for the audit of accounts for the financial year 2018-2019. The suspended Board of Directors informed the IRP that the Corporate Debtor had been non-operational since 2014-2015 and had no tangible assets. The IRP

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Corporate Debtor should be liquidated given the relationship between the financial …

**Ratio:** Section 33 of the IBC allows the Adjudicating Authority to pass an order for liquidation

…

**Reasoning:** The Adjudicating Authority reasoned that the CoC could not be effectively convened due to

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of Section 33 in conjunction with the facts of the case

…

**Application:** Given the related-party issue, the Adjudicating Authority applied the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** ABNI RANJAN KUMAR…; K.K. V…
- **Appellants:** Sudha Rani…
- **Respondents:** Vintron Communicat…; Pankaj…

## Timeline

- **2019-10-15 — Application A…**: Application under Section 7 of IBC…
- **2019-10-20 — Public Annou…**: IRP made a public…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 60(5) — Adjudicating Authority for corporate persons](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-60)

---

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/nclt-chandigarh/vintron-communication-pvt-ltd-ib-1492-nd-2019-1a029807