# In the matter of Nesa India Producer Company Limited Company Application No. 989-2021 in Company Petition (IB) No. 2863-ND-2019

> NCLT judgment dated 2022-01-25. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLT-04373. The case involves a company petition filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 25 Jan 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLT-04373
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/nesa-india-producer-company-limited-company-application-no-989-2021-in-company-p-effb89bb

## Summary

### Background

The case involves a company petition filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) by Sunil Kumar, an operational creditor, against Nesa India Producer Company Limited. The petition was admitted on 25.11.2019, initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). Sudhanshu Gupta was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). The IRP performed duties such as public announcement, intimation to the corporate debtor, and visiting the registered office. However, the IRP faced challenges in obtaining necessary documents and cooperation from the directors of the suspended board. The IRP also observed suspicious cash transactions and discrepancies in the financial statements of the corporate debtor. Despite attempts to communicate with

…

## Facts

Sunil Kumar, an operational creditor, filed a petition under Section 9 of the IBC against Nesa India Producer Company Limited. The petition was admitted on 25.11.2019, initiating CIRP, and Sudhanshu Gupta was appointed as IRP. The IRP performed duties like public announcement and intimation to the corporate debtor. The IRP faced difficulties in obtaining documents and cooperation from the directors of the suspended board, including Mr. Ashaq Aslam and Mr. Hitesh. The IRP observed suspicious cash transactions and discrepancies in the financial statements. The corporate debtor did not have any current or non-current liabilities. The IRP attempted to communicate with the directors and the operational creditor but received no claims. The last date for submission of claims

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) can be terminated on the request of the …

**Ratio:** The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) does not provide a specific provision for

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the IBC does not allow for termination of CIRP merely because no

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of the IBC suggests that the CIRP, once initiated, must

…

**Application:** In this case, the IRP requested termination due to the lack of claims and the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** ABNI RANJAN KUMAR…; AVINASH K.…
- **Appellants:** SUNIL K…
- **Respondents:** Nesa India…

## Timeline

- **2019-11-25 — Initiation…**: The Tribunal admitted the petition filed by Sunil Kumar and initiated the Corporate…
- **2020-01-10 — Public Annou…**: The IRP made a public announcement in Form A of the schedule, which was published in two…

## 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/nesa-india-producer-company-limited-company-application-no-989-2021-in-company-p-effb89bb