Satya Prakash Gupta Liquidator Of Reom ... vs M/S Chryso India Private Limited
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1223 of 2025
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The statutory liquidation period, including any extension, having expired, an application by the liquidator for further extension filed about eight months after that expiry, unsupported by a satisfactory explanation, may be rejected; the mere receipt of an expression of interest from a third party to acquire the corporate debtor as a going concern does not by itself furnish a ground for extending the liquidation period.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Satya Prakash Gupta, Liquidator of Reom Infrastructure & Construction Ltd. ...Appellant Versus Chryso (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Kunal Tandon, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sinha Shrey Nikhilesh, Mr. Nayan Dubey, Advocates. For Respondents :
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
20.08.2025: Heard learned counsel for the Appellant. This appeal has
been filed against the order dated 28.05.2025 by which order the Adjudicating
Authority has rejected the application filed by the Liquidator for extension of
period of liquidation. Liquidation was directed by the Adjudicating Authority
on 28.11.2022. Period of liquidation including extensions came to end on
19.08.2024. Application of extension was filed by the Liquidator after a lapse
of more than eight months of the previous expiry period, which has been
rejected. The Adjudicating Authority in the impugned order made following
observations:
"As per the submission made by Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Liquidator, all the assets of the corporate debtors have been confiscated by the Directorate General of Married Accommodation Project
Cont'd.../ (DGMAP) one of the outfit of the Ministry of Defence. It is further submitted that Directorate General of Married Accommodation Project (DGMAP) is also one of the creditors of this corporate debtor. It is also submitted that these assets were confiscated prior to initiation of CIRP.
The Liquidator has filed an Application for extension on 14.05.2025 when the actual extended period of liquidation got over on 19.08.2024. There is no genuine reason has been given in the Application for Extension filed after a lapse of more than eight months of the previous expiry period. As there are no assets in the control of the Liquidator till date despite several attempts made and in view of the submissions made by the Liquidator on that aspect, we see no further reason to continue with the liquidation process and accordingly, direct for dissolution of the corporate debtor forthwith. The Application, IA/2495/ND/2025 is disposed of in terms of the above direction."
2. Learned counsel for the Appellant, Shri Kunal Tandon, challenging the
order referred to the minutes of the second meeting of the Stakeholders
Consultation Committee held on 28.04.2025, in which following was
observed:
"After continuous follow-up on 10th of April 2025, the suspended directors have provided Audited Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2019 and 19.07.2019. Liquidators has asked for complete books of accounts for the same period including Tally accounting software data for assessment and for completing the accounting and
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1223 of 2025 2 of 4 audit of books of accounts for the FY 2019-20, 2020- 21, 2021-22, 2022-23, 2023-24, 2024-25 and for current financial period. The liquidators is still following up with suspended directors and ex- management.
Recently liquidators has received emails from one entity enquiring about the status of liquidation proceedings and shown interest to acquire the company under going concern. At this point liquidator is exploring the possibilities of sale of companies. The Liquidator informed that after creation of Books of account and audit of the balance sheet for the above period, valuation of the assets of the CD required to be done from two registered valuers. The liquidator is expecting to complete the above in next two months time. He informed that the extended period of liquidation proceeding ended in August 2024 and due to non movement of the matter no further extension sought. Now an application for condonation of delay in filing for extension of time from August 2024 to filing of this application is required to be made. Further an application for extension of six month time for concluding the liquidation proceedings required to be filed.
It is submitted that in view of the said observation, application was filed.
4. The mere fact that certain email has been received by a person showing
interest to acquire the company as going concern is not a reason for extending
the liquidation period, when the liquidation period including extended
liquidation period has come to an end and application has been filed by the
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1223 of 2025 3 of 4 Liquidator after 8 months of expiry of last extension. The Adjudicating
Authority has also noticed that all the assets of the corporate debtors have
been confiscated prior to initiation of CIRP. Learned counsel for the
Liquidator submits that Arbitration proceedings are pending in this regard.
Be that as it may. We do not find any error in the order of the Adjudicating
Authority rejecting the application filed by the Liquidator for extension of
liquidation period for the reasons given in the order, as noted above. We,
thus, do not find any ground to interfere with the order impugned passed by
the Adjudicating Authority rejecting the application filed by the Liquidator.
Appeal is dismissed.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) Archana/nn
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1223 of 2025 4 of 4
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free