The case involves a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) initiated against a Corporate Debtor. The Tribunal initially ordered the initiation of CIRP and appointed Mr. Vasudevan Gopu as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). The Corporate Debtor appealed to the NCLAT, which granted an interim stay on the CIRP and later set aside the Tribunal's order. Subsequently, the matter was appealed to the Supreme Court, which set aside the NCLAT's order and upheld the Tribunal's decision to initiate CIRP. The RP did not constitute the CoC post the Hon'ble Supreme Court order. The initial IRP, Mr. Vasudevan Gopu, submitted a withdrawal letter.
The NCLT initiated CIRP against a Corporate Debtor, appointing Mr. Vasudevan Gopu as IRP. The IRP invited creditors to submit claims. The Corporate Debtor appealed to the NCLAT, which initially stayed the CIRP and later set aside the NCLT's order. The matter then went to the Supreme Court, which reversed the NCLAT's decision and upheld the CIRP initiation. After the Supreme Court's order, no progress was made, and the initial IRP, Mr. Vasudevan Gopu, submitted a withdrawal letter. The Tribunal noted the lack of progress and the IRP's withdrawal. The Tribunal then appointed Mr. C.Prabakaran as the new IRP and directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 2 lakhs towards CIRP expenses. The Corporate Debtor was ordered to cooperate with the new IRP and handover all relevant
…Sign in to view the parties.
Tribunal directed to initiate CIRP against…
NCLAT order…
Sign in to view related legal provisions.
The case involves a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) initiated against a Corporate Debtor. The Tribunal initially ordered the initiation of CIRP and appointed Mr. Vasudevan Gopu as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). The Corporate Debtor appealed to the NCLAT, which granted an interim stay on the CIRP and later set aside the Tribunal's order. Subsequently, the matter was appealed to the Supreme Court, which set aside the NCLAT's order and upheld the Tribunal's decision to initiate CIRP. The RP did not constitute the CoC post the Hon'ble Supreme Court order. The initial IRP, Mr. Vasudevan Gopu, submitted a withdrawal letter.
The NCLT initiated CIRP against a Corporate Debtor, appointing Mr. Vasudevan Gopu as IRP. The IRP invited creditors to submit claims. The Corporate Debtor appealed to the NCLAT, which initially stayed the CIRP and later set aside the NCLT's order. The matter then went to the Supreme Court, which reversed the NCLAT's decision and upheld the CIRP initiation. After the Supreme Court's order, no progress was made, and the initial IRP, Mr. Vasudevan Gopu, submitted a withdrawal letter. The Tribunal noted the lack of progress and the IRP's withdrawal. The Tribunal then appointed Mr. C.Prabakaran as the new IRP and directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 2 lakhs towards CIRP expenses. The Corporate Debtor was ordered to cooperate with the new IRP and handover all relevant
…Tribunal directed to initiate CIRP against…
NCLAT order…
Sign in to view related legal provisions.