AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
28.01.2026 : This appeal has been filed by the appellant challenging the order dated 14.11.2025 passed by the adjudicating authority (National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench, Court – III).
Learned counsel for the respondent pointed out that there is a divergence of opinion given by the Judicial Member and Technical Member.
In the appeal, appellant has prayed for various reliefs:
“a)Kindly, allow the present Appeal and set aside the Order dated 14.11.2025 passed by the Hon'ble Adjudicating Authority (Member Judicial), New Delhi in I.A. No. 836/2023 in C.P. (IB) No. 654 (PB)/2019;
b)Direct that the Committee of Creditors be reconstituted by considering the claim of the Appellant Bank as secured financial creditor in view of the law laid down by this Hon'ble Tribunal in Company Appeal (AT) (INS) No. 390 of 2023 dated 09.01.2025;
c)Direct that the Resolution Plan approved by the wrongly constituted Committee of Creditors attains no validity in the eyes of law;
d)Direct that para 9.7 of Chapter 9 of the wrongly approved resolution plan will not supersede the mandate of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code which holds the Appellant Bank as secured financial creditor; and
e)Direct the issuance of publication of fresh Form G inviting the expression of interest from the interested resolution applicants for the revival of the Corporate Debtor;
Pass any such or further order (s) as this Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”
Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that reference has been made by the President by order dated 16.12.2023 to the Third Member to hear the difference of opinion as per law.
Learned counsel for the appellant contended that appellant is aggrieved by the decision taken by the Judicial member which qualifies the order under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for short the Code or the IBC).
When there being difference of opinion in Judicial Member and Technical Member and matter has already been referred, we are of the view that appellant need to await the decision of Third Member and after the opinion of Third Member and the order passed by the adjudicating authority, appellant shall have ample opportunity to file the appeal and raise all issues permissible in law.
With these observations, appeal is disposed of accordingly.