# In he matter of Hindustan Magnesium Products Private Limited IA (IBC) 1492-2022 in Company Petition (IB) No. 225-7-HDB-2021

> NCLT judgment dated 2023-02-17. Citation: TCN-2023-NCLT-04559. The case involves an application filed by Bala Anand Jeldi, the Promoter, Director, and…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 17 Feb 2023
- **Citation:** TCN-2023-NCLT-04559
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/in-he-matter-of-hindustan-magnesium-products-private-limited-ia-ibc-1492-2022-in-578cb872

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an application filed by Bala Anand Jeldi, the Promoter, Director, and Shareholder of Hindustan Magnesium Products Private Limited/Corporate Debtor, challenging Clause 6(r) of the Resolution Plan submitted by Respondent No.2, K. Venkata Ratna Prasad. The application was filed under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The applicant contends that Clause 6(r) of the Resolution Plan is illegal because the Corporate Debtor has not developed any technical know-how relating to manufacturing of Aluminium and Magnesium Alloy, and no intellectual property Right was registered or assigned in the name of the Corporate Debtor in connection with manufacturing of Aluminum and Magnesium. The applicant also alleges that the Resolution

…

## Facts

Bala Anand Jeldi, the Promoter, Director, and Shareholder of Hindustan Magnesium Products Private Limited (Corporate Debtor), filed an application challenging Clause 6(r) of the Resolution Plan submitted by K. Venkata Ratna Prasad (Respondent No.2). The Company Petition filed by Respondent No.2 was admitted under Section 7 of the IBC on 2022-04-19, and Shri V. Shankar was appointed as Interim Resolution Professional. The 5th Committee of Creditors (COC) Meeting held on 2022-09-21 approved the resolution plan submitted by Respondent No.2. The applicant contends that the Resolution Professional failed to provide the Resolution Plan to the Applicant along with the notice. The applicant argues that the Corporate Debtor has not developed any technical know-how relating to

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether Clause 6(r) of the Resolution plan can be struck off on the grounds urged in the …

**Ratio:** The ratio is that a clause in the resolution plan pertaining to the Corporate Debtor's

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal reasoned that the Applicant failed to provide any evidence to support the

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation is that the resolution plan should accurately reflect the

…

**Application:** In this case, the Applicant claimed that Clause 6(r) of the Resolution Plan

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Venkata Ramakrishn…; Shri. Chara…
- **Appellants:** Bala Anand…
- **Respondents:** Hindustan…; V. Sha…

## Timeline

- **2021-01-01 — Company Petition (IB)…**: Company Petition (IB) No.…
- **2022-04-19 — Company Petition…**: The Tribunal admitted the Company Petition filed by Respondent No.2 under Section 7 of…

## 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-division-bench-court-i-chenn/in-he-matter-of-hindustan-magnesium-products-private-limited-ia-ibc-1492-2022-in-578cb872