# In the matter of Neptune Inflatables Limited TP-2(CHE)-2021 in CP No. 201 of 1996

> NCLT judgment dated 2022-02-01. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLT-04291. The case involves a winding-up petition filed by TIDCI Limited against Neptune Inflatables…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 1 Feb 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLT-04291
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/neptune-inflatables-limited-tp-2che-2021-in-cp-no-201-of-1996-0de62e2b

## Summary

### Background

The case involves a winding-up petition filed by TIDCI Limited against Neptune Inflatables Limited under Section 433(e) and (f) of the Companies Act, 1956, before the Hon'ble High Court of Madras. The High Court ordered the winding up of the company on 13.03.1998. Harikrishna, Proprietor of M/s. Classic Marketing, a creditor of Neptune Inflatables Limited, filed a Company Application No. 98 of 2021 seeking the transfer of proceedings to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Chennai, to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under the IBC, 2016. The High Court of Madras transferred the proceedings to the NCLT on 13.08.2021.

## Facts

TIDCI Limited filed a winding-up petition against Neptune Inflatables Limited under the Companies Act, 1956, which led to a winding-up order by the High Court of Madras on 13.03.1998. Despite the order, the company's affairs remained unresolved. Harikrishna, a creditor, sought the transfer of the proceedings to NCLT to initiate CIRP under the IBC, 2016. The High Court transferred the proceedings on 13.08.2021. The NCLT then admitted the petition, initiated CIRP, appointed Mr. Mudappalur Varieth Gangadharan as IRP, and imposed a moratorium. The key fact is the transfer of a long-pending winding-up case to CIRP under the new insolvency regime.

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the winding-up proceedings initiated under the Companies Act, 1956 can be transferred to …

**Ratio:** The IBC, 2016 allows for the transfer of winding-up proceedings to NCLT for initiation of

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that since the winding-up process initiated by the High Court had not

…

**Interpretation:** This interprets the IBC as providing a mechanism to resolve pending winding-up

…

**Application:** The ratio is applied to the fact that the winding-up proceedings were pending

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** S. Ramath…; Anil Ku…
- **Appellants:** Harikri…
- **Respondents:** Neptune Inflatable…

## Timeline

- **1998-03-13 — Winding Up…**: The Hon'ble High Court of Madras ordered the…
- **2021-08-13 — Transfer of Pr…**: The Hon'ble High Court of Madras transferred the winding-up proceedings to the National…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 9 — Application for initiation of corporate insolvency…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-9)

---

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/neptune-inflatables-limited-tp-2che-2021-in-cp-no-201-of-1996-0de62e2b