AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
09.02.2026: We have heard counsel for the appellant as well as respondent.
These appeals have been filed challenging the order dated 31.10.2025 passed by National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, Court-1 in IA Nos. 5629/2024, I.A. No. 5630/2025, I.A. No. 03/2025, I.A. No. 600/2025 and I.A. No. 04/2025. These applications were filed by the appellant seeking deletion of their name in the I.A. No. 2839 of 2024 filed by the Resolution Professional under Section 66(1) of the IBC. By the impugned order Adjudicating Authority has rejected the application. In para-17 of the order, Adjudicating Authority has made following observations:-
“17.In view of aforesaid, we are of considered view that the applicant’s prayer of deletion cannot be considered at this stage without examination of pleadings in IA 2839 of 2024 in full with respect to the culpability of the applicants in the affairs of the Corporate Debtor. Needless to say, the Applicant(s) shall be at liberty to argue their case on merit with respect to their role and no observation made in this order shall prejudice their case on this aspect.”
Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that subsequent to passing of the impugned order Adjudicating Authority by subsequent order 12.01.2026 has already decided the IA No. 2839 of 2024 has dismissed the IA by disposing the same. It is submitted that in para-28 of the order dated 12.01.2026 liberty has been granted to the RP or the representative of the Financial Creditor to file an application before the Tribunal. It is relevant to notice the following observation in paragraph 28:-
“…… Since, the details thereof are not available in the application, we direct the RP to collate the same and fix the responsibility of persons who were occupying the office of director during the relevant period. For this purpose, the RP or representative of financial creditor, as the case may be, shall be, at liberty, to file an application before this Tribunal for appropriate orders in this relation.”
In view of the fact that Adjudicating Authority has granted liberty to the RP or Financial Creditor to file the fresh application; we are of the view that observations which were made in para-17 of the impugned order that prayer for deletion cannot be considered at that stage and applicant shall be at liberty to argue their case on merit at the time of decision of the application shall endeavour to their benefit when any fresh application is filed.
We thus make it clear that dismissal of the application by the impugned order shall not come in the way of raising all pleas permissible to the applicant when any application as per liberty granted by the order dated 12.01.2026 is being heard. With these observations, we dismiss all the appeals.