# In the matter of Vipul -S Plastocrafts Pvt. Ltd.

> NCLT judgment dated 2023-11-23. Citation: TCN-2023-NCLT-00604. The case involves an application for the liquidation of Vipul S-Plastocrafts Private Limited,…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 23 Nov 2023
- **Citation:** TCN-2023-NCLT-00604
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/vipul-s-plastocrafts-pvt-ltd-166bc3da

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an application for the liquidation of Vipul S-Plastocrafts Private Limited, the Corporate Debtor. The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was initiated against the Corporate Debtor following a petition filed by Trimurti Services, the Operational Creditor, which was admitted on 2019-03-11. Jovita Reema Mathias was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). The CIRP period was set to expire on 2019-09-06. The CoC did not approve a resolution plan within the CIRP period, nor could they resolve to extend the CIRP period by 90 days with the required voting share.

## Facts

On 2019-03-11, the petition filed by Trimurti Services, the Operational Creditor, against Vipul S-Plastocrafts Private Limited, the Corporate Debtor, was admitted, initiating the CIRP. Jovita Reema Mathias was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). The publication occurred on 2019-03-15, informing the CoC about the Expressions of Interest (EOIs) received from prospective resolution applicants. The CIRP period was set to expire on 2019-09-06. The CoC failed to approve a resolution plan or extend the CIRP period by the required voting share. The Corporate Debtor continued operating as a going concern and even made a modest profit during the CIRP. The Applicant, Jovita Reema Mathias, expressed her inability to continue as the liquidator due to other

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Corporate Debtor, Vipul S-Plastocrafts Private Limited, should be liquidated under …

**Ratio:** Section 33(1)(a) of the IBC mandates liquidation if the CoC does not approve a resolution

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that since the CoC failed to approve a resolution plan or extend the

…

**Interpretation:** Section 33(1)(a) is interpreted to mean that if the CIRP does not result in a

…

**Application:** The ratio and reasoning apply to the specific facts because the CoC failed to

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Prabhat…; V.G. B…
- **Respondents:** Vipul S. Plastocra…
- **Advocates:** Nupur…; Amir Ars…; +2 more

## Timeline

- **2018-01-01 — Company Petiti…**: Company Petition No.…
- **2019-03-11 — Petition Ad…**: The Tribunal admitted the petition filed by…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 60(5) — Adjudicating Authority for corporate persons](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-60)

---

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/vipul-s-plastocrafts-pvt-ltd-166bc3da