# In the matter of Trimurti Concast Private Limited IA (IB) NO. 374-ALD-2021 in CP (IB) No. 355-ALD-2019

> NCLT judgment dated 2022-03-22. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLT-03598. The case pertains to an application filed under sections 30(6) r/w 31(1) of the Insolvency &…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 22 Mar 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLT-03598
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/trimurti-concast-private-limited-ia-ib-no-374-ald-2021-in-cp-ib-no-355-ald-2019-3abd8dd8

## Summary

### Background

The case pertains to an application filed under sections 30(6) r/w 31(1) of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for approval of a resolution plan for Trimurti Concast Private Limited. The corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) was initiated based on a petition filed by Ram Alloys Casting Pvt Ltd under section 7 of the IBC. The resolution plan was approved by 100% of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) in their 18th meeting. The CIRP period had expired on 21-06-2020, but extensions and exclusions were granted by the Adjudicating Authority. The resolution professional (RP) issued Form G multiple times, and after negotiations, a resolution plan from PRA Sponge Sales (India) Private Limited was received but later found unviable. Eventually, a resolution plan

…

## Facts

Ram Alloys Casting Private Limited initiated CIRP against Trimurti Concast Private Limited under Section 7 of IBC. Sanjay Kumar Dewani was appointed as IRP, later replaced by Sumit Shukla. The CIRP period was extended with exclusions granted by the Adjudicating Authority. Public announcements were made, and claims were invited. Canara Bank was the sole financial creditor with 100% voting share. Sarvottam Rolling Mills Pvt Ltd initially submitted a resolution plan, which was approved but later withdrawn. Shree Shailja Iron and Steels Pvt Ltd then submitted a resolution plan, which was approved by the CoC with 100% voting share. The resolution plan proposed a payment of Rs 50 lakhs upfront for CIRP costs and Rs 1075 lakhs to secured financial creditors. The liquidation

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the resolution plan complies with the requirements of Section 30(2) of the Insolvency and …

**Ratio:** Section 30(2) of the IBC mandates that a resolution plan must provide for the payment of

…

**Reasoning:** The court examined the resolution plan to determine whether it adequately provided for

…

**Interpretation:** Section 30(2) is interpreted to ensure that the resolution plan prioritizes

…

**Application:** The court found that the resolution plan proposed an upfront payment of Rs 50

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Rajasekha…; Virendra Kumar…
- **Respondents:** Trimurti Concast…

## Timeline

- **2019-12-24 — Admission of Company…**: Company Petition in CP(IB)No. 355/ALD/2019…
- **2019-12-27 — Public Annou…**: IRP made public announcement on…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 5 — Definitions](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-5)

---

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/trimurti-concast-private-limited-ia-ib-no-374-ald-2021-in-cp-ib-no-355-ald-2019-3abd8dd8