Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 04 NCLAT CK 1894

Committee Of Creditors Of Eskay K 'N' IT (India) Limited Through Bank Of India vs Ajit Kumar Insolvency Professional

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal · Decided on 17 April 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Justice N. Seshasayee, Member (Judicial) · Arun Baroka, Member (Technical)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 99 of 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 381 words

(Hybrid Mode)

This appeal is filed by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) of M/S. Eskay K ‘N’ IT (India) Limited, challenging the order of the Adjudicating Authority appointing a Liquidator, overlooking the recommendation of the CoC to allow the RP continue as the liquidator, based on the IBBI circular dated 18.07.2023 (Circular No. Liq-12011/214/2023-IBBI/840).

2.

This issue is squarely covered by the ratio laid down by this Tribunal in [Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1165 of 2025] Manish Jaju Erstwhile Resolution Professional of Rajesh Landmark Projects Private Limited Vs. The Committee of Creditors of Rajesh Landmark Projects Private Limited Through M/s Asset Care & Reconstruction Enterprise Limited & Anr. which was followed in [Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1020 of 2025] Mr. Nipul Bansal, Former Resolution Professional, M/s Cheema Spintex Limited Vs. M/s Cheema Spintex Limited & Ors.

3.

In these authorities, the effect of the IBBI Circular dated 18.07.2023 (Circular No. Liq-12011/214/2023-IBBI/840) has been considered, and the right or authority of the CoC to appoint a liquidator of its choice has been recognised. In view of these facts, the order of the Adjudicating Authority appointing a person of its own choice as the Liquidator cannot be sustained.

4.

The learned counsel for the Liquidator submits that while the present liquidator may not have a locus standi to contest, as he does not have any vested right to be a liquidator, he is required to place certain facts on record. Learned counsel further submits that the RP, whom the CoC has recommended, is not eligible to be a RP and equally not eligible to be appointed as a Liquidator.

5.

This issue, however, is left open for the Adjudicating Authority to take a call. In the present case, we only hold that, in view of the judgments in Manish Jaju Erstwhile Resolution Professional of Rajesh Landmark Projects Private Limited Vs. The Committee of Creditors of Rajesh Landmark Projects Private Limited Through M/s Asset Care & Reconstruction Enterprise Limited & Anr., [Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1165 of 2025] and Mr. Nipul Bansal, Former Resolution Professional, M/s Cheema Spintex Limited Vs. M/s Cheema Spintex Limited & Ors., [Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1020 of 2025], the CoC has the right to appoint the Liquidator.

6.

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. No costs.