# In the matter of Sai Krishnodaya Industries Pvt. Ltd.

> NCLT judgment dated 2023-04-24. Citation: TCN-2023-NCLT-03660. The case pertains to IA 136/2022 filed in CP(IB) No. 198/7/HDB/2019 before the National Company…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 24 Apr 2023
- **Citation:** TCN-2023-NCLT-03660
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/sai-krishnodaya-industries-pvt-ltd-be91e474

## Summary

### Background

The case pertains to IA 136/2022 filed in CP(IB) No. 198/7/HDB/2019 before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Hyderabad Bench. The application was filed under Section 33(1), 33(2), and 34(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) seeking orders for the liquidation of the Corporate Debtor, Saikrishnodaya Industries Pvt Ltd, and the appointment of Mr. Arun Kumar Malani as the Liquidator. The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was initiated against the Corporate Debtor on 17.10.2019, and Mr. Arun Kumar Malani was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP), later confirmed as the Resolution Professional (RP). Despite efforts to find a resolution plan, none was received, leading to the application for liquidation.

## Facts

The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was initiated against Saikrishnodaya Industries Pvt Ltd on 2019-10-17. Arun Kumar Malani was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) and later confirmed as the Resolution Professional (RP). The IRP called for claims, and only one Financial Creditor submitted a claim. The Committee of Creditors (CoC) was constituted, and meetings were held. The CoC decided to commence the CIRP and call for Expression of Interest (EoI), but no EoI was received. The suspended Directors of the Corporate Debtor proposed to settle the dues if given sufficient time, leading to a request for a 90-day extension. The CoC requested consideration of the COVID lockdown period. The Adjudicating Authority excluded 129 days from the

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority should allow the application for liquidation of the Corporate …

**Ratio:** Section 33(1) of the IBC stipulates that if the Adjudicating Authority does not receive a

…

**Reasoning:** The Adjudicating Authority reasoned that despite the efforts made during the CIRP,

…

**Interpretation:** Section 33(1) of the IBC is interpreted to mean that liquidation is the default

…

**Application:** In this case, the Adjudicating Authority applied Section 33(1) of the IBC to

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** DR.VENKATA…; Satya Ranjan…
- **Appellants:** Sarwottam Ispat…
- **Respondents:** Saikrishnodaya…

## Timeline

- **2019-10-17 — CIRP Init…**: Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP)…
- **2019-11-06 — CIRP Commen…**: CIRP commenced w.e.f.…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 33(1) — Initiation of liquidation](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-33)

---

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/sai-krishnodaya-industries-pvt-ltd-be91e474