The case pertains to IA/105(MP)2023 filed in CP(IB) 42 of 2020, concerning Sagar Autotech Pvt Ltd under Section 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) commenced on 2022-06-23. The application was filed seeking liquidation of the corporate debtor due to the absence of a resolution plan within the stipulated time frame. The Committee of Creditors (CoC) did not approve any resolution plan or extension of the CIRP period with the required majority.
The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) for Sagar Autotech Pvt Ltd commenced on 2022-06-23. Despite the passage of more than 180 days, no resolution plan was filed as per the provisions of Section 30(6) of the IBC. The Resolution Professional (RP) did not file any application under Section 12(2) for an extension of the CIRP period. The Committee of Creditors (CoC) did not have the requisite 66% voting share to support either a resolution plan or an application for extending the CIRP period. The voting status on a resolution indicated that 55.45% voted in favor, and 45.55% voted against. The application under Section 10 of IBC was filed for liquidation. The RP consented to act as the liquidator. The court observed that the application was not maintainable
…Sign in to view the parties.
Corporate Insolvency…
7th meeting of the…
The case pertains to IA/105(MP)2023 filed in CP(IB) 42 of 2020, concerning Sagar Autotech Pvt Ltd under Section 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) commenced on 2022-06-23. The application was filed seeking liquidation of the corporate debtor due to the absence of a resolution plan within the stipulated time frame. The Committee of Creditors (CoC) did not approve any resolution plan or extension of the CIRP period with the required majority.
The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) for Sagar Autotech Pvt Ltd commenced on 2022-06-23. Despite the passage of more than 180 days, no resolution plan was filed as per the provisions of Section 30(6) of the IBC. The Resolution Professional (RP) did not file any application under Section 12(2) for an extension of the CIRP period. The Committee of Creditors (CoC) did not have the requisite 66% voting share to support either a resolution plan or an application for extending the CIRP period. The voting status on a resolution indicated that 55.45% voted in favor, and 45.55% voted against. The application under Section 10 of IBC was filed for liquidation. The RP consented to act as the liquidator. The court observed that the application was not maintainable
…Corporate Insolvency…
7th meeting of the…