Authority: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench (Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, Member (Judicial) and Jatindranath Swain, Member (Technical))

Order Date: 06.07.2026

Case Overview

The appeal was filed by Mr. Srinivasa Rao Idupulapati, erstwhile Chief Promoter and Managing Director of M/s. ISR Infra Pvt Limited, challenging the NCLT Amravati bench's order dated 10.05.2021 that directed liquidation of the corporate debtor under Section 33(1)(a) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The appellant contended that the liquidation was ordered without properly exploring resolution possibilities and that he had been pursuing a One-Time Settlement (OTS) with the sole financial creditor, Indian Overseas Bank.

The corporate debtor, ISR Infra Pvt Limited, was initially admitted into Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) based on a Section 9 application filed by operational creditor M/s. CMR Transport Contractors. The appellant settled the operational creditor's dues and submitted Form FA to the Resolution Professional. However, the financial creditor declined the OTS proposals requiring full down payment.

The Resolution Professional filed the liquidation application (IA No. 176/2019) based on the Committee of Creditors' resolution passed with 100% voting in favor of liquidation. The CoC cited non-receipt of any resolution plan, the appellant's failure to honor OTS commitments despite multiple extensions, and lack of confidence in his proposals. The CIRP period was extended multiple times (initially by 60 days on 26.02.2020, then until 05.05.2020, and further extensions) but no resolution plan was received by the final deadline of 15.07.2020.

The appellant had filed recall applications (including IA No. 30/2021) seeking more time for settlement, promising to deposit Rs. 2.20 crores in addition to Rs. 80 lakh already paid, but failed to honor these commitments citing COVID-induced health conditions. The NCLT recorded that the appellant had shown non-cooperation and non-participation in CoC meetings, delaying the process, and that the liquidation application remained uncontroverted.

Final Outcome

The NCLAT dismissed the appeal, upholding the NCLT's liquidation order. The tribunal found that the liquidation was a legal consequence justified under Section 33(1)(a) of the IBC due to the appellant's dereliction, failed settlement attempts despite multiple opportunities, and the CoC's unanimous decision. The corporate debtor will proceed with liquidation as ordered.

Topics: Corporate Insolvency, Liquidation Order, NCLAT Judgment