SUPREME COURT
Byju's CoC Moves Supreme Court After NCLAT Refuses Impleadment In GLAS Trust Removal Plea
Today, the Committee of Creditors (CoC) of Byju's parent company Think & Learn Pvt Ltd, moved the Supreme Court challenging an order passed by the Chennai Bench of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) on 24 February 2026.
On 24 February, the NCLAT had held that although the CoC may litigate in its own name under the IBC, it was not a necessary party to the plea seeking removal of GLAS Trust and accordingly upheld the Bengaluru National Company Law Tribunal's (NCLT) 26 August 2025 order dismissing the CoC's impleadment application.
Defunct Scheme Of Arrangement Under Companies Act Cannot Stall IBC Proceedings: Supreme Court
Case Title : Omkara Assets Reconstruction Private Limited. Versus Amit Chaturvedi and Ors. Case Number : C.A. 11417 OF 2025
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz SC 87
The Supreme Court on Tuesday held that insolvency proceedings under the IBC cannot be kept in abeyance on the basis of a Scheme of Arrangement that has become redundant and inoperative for non-compliance with statutory requirements. The court reiterated that once the statutory requirements of Section 7 are met, insolvency must proceed notwithstanding any parallel company law proceedings.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and K. Vinod Chandran framed the core issue as whether pendency of proceedings relating to a Scheme of Arrangement before the High Court could justify keeping a CIRP in abeyance.
NCLT, NCLAT Cannot Nullify Benami Act Confiscation In IBC Proceedings: Supreme Court
Case Title : S. Rajendran vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Benami Prohibition) & Ors Case Number : C.A. 7142 OF 2022
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz SC 86
The Supreme Court on Tuesday held that insolvency tribunals cannot nullify confiscation of property under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, ruling that once property is confiscated under Section 27, it vests absolutely in the Central Government and falls outside the liquidation estate under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
A Bench of Justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar dismissed appeals filed by liquidators who had sought to challenge attachment proceedings initiated under the Benami Act, holding that the IBC does not provide an indirect route to question sovereign action validly undertaken under a penal statute.
Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Against NCLAT Order Rejecting Insolvency Plea Against Voltas
Case Title : Air Wave Technocrafts Pvt Ltd vs Voltas Ltd
Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1505 OF 2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz SC 84
The Supreme Court has recently refused to interfere with the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal's decision dismissing the insolvency plea filed by Air Wave Technocrafts Pvt. Ltd against Voltas Ltd, a Tata Group company engaged in air-conditioning and engineering services.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and K. Vinod Chandran dismissed the civil appeal arising out of the NCLAT judgment of November 27, 2025, which had refused to admit insolvency against Voltas for for an operational debt of over Rs 1.20 crores.
Supreme Court Refuses To Interfere With NCLAT Order Upholding CIRP Against Kirtiman Cements
Case Title : Jatinder Oberoi v. Narendra Singh Chhabra & Anr.
Case Number : Civil Appeal 731-733 of 2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz SC 94
The Supreme Court on Friday declined to interfere with a National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) judgment upholding the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Kirtiman Cements and Packaging Industries Ltd. under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC).
A Bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K.V. Viswanathan dismissed the Civil Appeal filed under Section 62 of the IBC, stating that it was not inclined to interfere with the NCLAT's judgment dated 17 December 2025.
Case Title : The CoC of Think & Learn Pvt Ltd vs Riju Raveendran & Ors
Case Number : C.A. 2594/2026
The Supreme Court of India on Friday continued NCLAT's interim direction restraining the NCLT from passing final orders in the plea before NCLT Bengaluru seeking removal of GLAS Trust from the Committee of Creditors of ed-tech Byju's parent Think & Learn Pvt. Ltd., while issuing notice on the CoC's appeal against rejection of its impleadment application.
A Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan issued notice on the appeal and directed, “Court is directed to maintain status quo till the next date of hearing. The interim order earlier granted by NCLAT shall continue to operate till the next date of hearing.”
Courts Must Remain Vigilant Against Expanding 'Narrow Boundaries' Of IBC Review: Supreme Court
Case Title : Torrent Power Ltd vs Ashish Arjunkumar Rathi & Ors
Case Number : C.A. 11746/2024
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz SC 96
The Supreme Court on Friday upheld the approval of Sarda Energy and Minerals Ltd.'s (SEML) resolution plan for SKS Power Generation (Chhattisgarh) Ltd., cautioning courts against expanding judicial review under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
Affirming the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal's order, which had upheld the National Company Law Tribunal's approval of the plan, a Bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and R Mahadevan stressed that the IBC prioritises speed and commercial wisdom over prolonged litigation.
Supreme Court Refuses To Frame Guidelines On Parallel Insolvency Against Borrower and Guarantor
Case Title : ICICI Bank Ltd vs ERA Infrastructure (India) Ltd & Ors
Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL NO.6094 OF 2019
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz SC 92
The Supreme Court on Thursday observed that while simultaneous Corporate Insolvency Resolution Processes (CIRPs) against principal borrowers and corporate guarantors are legally permissible, it will not frame additional judicial guidelines regulating such proceedings, leaving any reform to Parliament and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI).
Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Augustine George Masih delivered the judgment in a batch of appeals arising from orders of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), which had either rejected or permitted initiation of CIRP against principal borrowers and corporate guarantors for the same debt.
HIGH COURT
'Ruse To Exploit Mill Land': Bombay High Court Rejects Plea To Revive Swadeshi Mills
Case Title : Grand View Estates Private Limited v. Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction and Ors
Case Number : I.A No. 6953 of 2025 in Company Petition No.385 of 2002
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 91
The Bombay High Court on Monday dismissed an application filed by Grand View Estates Pvt Ltd seeking a stay of winding up proceedings and revival of Swadeshi Mills Company Ltd, holding that the proposal was not a genuine attempt to revive the textile company but an effort to exploit its valuable mill land for real estate development.
A single-judge bench of Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh observed that the revival plan was “nothing but a ruse to obtain the valuable land for exploitation in real estate market. At the core of the dispute lies 45 acres of land in the heart of city of Mumbai located in prime residential and commercial area which would command astronomical price given the potential of the property for development. The manner in which the Applicant has attempted to lay its hands on this valuable property of the company in liquidation leaves much to be desired,”
NCLAT
Rainbow Papers Ruling Not Ground To Reopen Approved Resolution Plan Over Belated Tax Dues: NCLAT
Case Title : State Tax Officer Vs Hasti Mal Kachhara & Ors.
Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) 1275/2023 & 1276/2023
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 59
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Delhi has observed that the Supreme Court's ruling in Sales Tax Officer v. Rainbow Papers Limited does not permit reopening of an approved resolution plan at the instance of a government department that failed to challenge the rejection of its claim at the appropriate stage. In Rainbow Papers, the Supreme Court had held that statutory government dues could qualify as secured debts and could not be ignored in a resolution plan.
Dismissing twin appeals filed by the State Tax Officer, a Bench of Judicial Member Justice N. Seshasayee and Technical Member Arun Baroka underlined that finality of an approved resolution plan cannot be unsettled merely because the claim relates to government dues.
Case Title : Committee of Creditors of Think and Learn Pvt. Ltd. Vs Riju Ravindran & Ors Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) 475/2025
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 60
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Chennai has held that a Committee of Creditors (CoC) can litigate in its own name under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, even though it does not possess juristic personality in the classical sense. The ruling came in proceedings involving Think and Learn Pvt. Ltd., the parent company of edtech firm Byju's.
A bench of Judicial Member Justice N Seshasayee and Technical Member Jatindranath Swain observed, “Therefore, since CoC is a statutory body and a decision- making entity, to deny it it's legal existence for all purposes merely because it is neither a juristic person might be akin to throwing the baby out with the bathwater.”
NCLAT Directs YG Estates To Hand Over Supertech Ecociti, 34 Pavilion Maintenance To RWAs In 30 Days
Case Title : Supertech Ecociti Apartment Owners Association v. Hitesh Goel (IRP) of Supertech Limited & Anr.
Case Number : I.A. No. 5459 of 2025 In Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 406 of 2022 CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 61
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Delhi has recently directed YG Estates Facilities Management Pvt. Ltd. to hand over maintenance of Supertech's Ecociti and 34 Pavilion projects in Noida to their registered apartment owners' associations within 30 days.
A bench of Judicial Member Justice Ashok Bhushan and Technical Member Barun Mitra held that since 99 percent of the homebuyers had taken possession and the associations were duly registered under the Uttar Pradesh Apartment Act, maintenance must be transferred under Section 14(5).
Direct Disbursement To Corporate Debtor Not Mandatory To Qualify As Financial Debt Under IBC: NCLAT
Case Title : Vistra ITCL (India) Limited Vs Vithal Madhukar Dahake & 2 Ors
Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) 1110/2024
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 62
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Delhi on Tuesday observed that direct disbursement of funds to a corporate debtor is not mandatory for a debt to qualify as a “financial debt” under Section 5(8) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
A bench of Judicial Member Justice Mohammad Faiz Alam Khan and Technical Member Naresh Salecha observed,
“We carefully observe that the Section does not use the word “to the Corporate Debtor” after word “disbursed”. From the statutory language, the essential ingredients of financial debt are Existence of a debt, Disbursement of money, Consideration for time value of money and Commercial effect of borrowing.”
NCLAT Refuses To Condone Delay In Appeal; Limitation Starts From Pronouncement, Not Uploading
Case Title : RP for Trading Engineers International Ltd. Versus Uttrakhand Power Corporation Ltd. & Anr.
Case Number : I.A. No. 5773 of 2025 in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1475 of 2025 CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 63
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Delhi has rejected an application seeking condonation of delay in filing an insolvency appeal by the Resolution Professional of Trading Engineers International Ltd., holding that in the facts of the case limitation commenced from the date the order was pronounced in open court and not from the date it was uploaded on the NCLT website.
A bench comprising Chairperson Justice Ashok Bhushan and Technical Member Barun Mitra found that the National Company Law Tribunal's order dated June 11, 2025 had been pronounced in open court in the presence of the appellant and his counsel. The appeal was e-filed on August 28, 2025.
NCLAT Allows AMNS To Replace ArcelorMittal India In ₹1,300 Crore Essar Steel RTU Appeal
Case Title : ArcelorMittal Nippon Steel India Limited v. SREI Infrastructure Finance Limited & Ors.
Case Number : I.A. No.1951 of 2025 in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No.1038 of 2020
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 65
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Delhi has allowed ArcelorMittal Nippon Steel India Private Limited to be transposed as the appellant in a pending appeal arising from the Rs 1,300 crore Right to Use charges dispute linked to the Essar Steel insolvency resolution process.
The company will replace ArcelorMittal India Pvt. Ltd., the original successful resolution applicant, in the proceedings. The tribunal clarified that the transposition will be subject to the applicant assuming all liabilities under the challenged order.
NCLAT Dismisses Dhoot Brothers' Plea, Upholds Insolvency Proceedings As Videocon Guarantors
Case Title : Rajkumar Nandlal Dhoot Versus State Bank Of India
Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1443 of 2024
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 66
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has dismissed appeals filed by Rajkumar Nandlal Dhoot and Pradeep Nandlal Dhoot, brothers of Videocon founder Venugopal Dhoot, clearing the way for insolvency proceedings against them in their capacity as personal guarantors to debt-ridden Videocon Industries Ltd.
A bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Technical Member Barun Mitra held that the applications moved by the State Bank of India under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code were filed within limitation. The tribunal noted that the guarantees had been invoked in 2018 and the insolvency proceedings were initiated within three years of that invocation.
Case Title : Mosco International Commodities Private Limited Versus SBEC Sugar Limited Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 860 of 2024
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 67
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Delhi has upheld the dismissal of a Section 9 insolvency plea against SBEC Sugar Limited, holding that the Rs 1 Crore threshold under Section 4 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code must be satisfied on the date of filing the petition and not on the date of issuing the demand notice.
A bench of Judicial Member Justice N. Seshasayee and Technical Members Arun Baroka and Indevar Pandey dismissed an appeal filed by Mosco International Commodities Private Limited after finding that the operational debt had fallen below Rs 1 Crore on the initiation date, that is, the date the Section 9 CIRP plea was filed.
120-Day Timeline For Personal Insolvency Resolution Process Is Directory, Not Mandatory: NCLAT Delhi
Case Title : Purushottam Behera v. State Bank of India & Ors.
Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 258 of 2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 68
On 26 February, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), New Delhi, held that the 120-day timeline for completing the Personal Insolvency Resolution Process (PIRP) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) is directory and not mandatory.
A Bench comprising Chairperson Justice Ashok Bhushan and Technical Member Indevar Pandey set aside the order of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Mumbai, which had refused to extend the process beyond the prescribed period. The Tribunal clarified that the Adjudicating Authority does not lose jurisdiction merely because the timeline under the IBBI Regulations has expired.
Project Segregation In CHD-Vann Real Estate Insolvency Justifies 525-Day CIRP Exclusion: NCLAT
Case Title : Hans Raj Bhogra Vs Rajesh Kumar Parakh
Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) 361/2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 70
Holding that in a real estate insolvency involving multiple projects, the period till segregation of a project from the CIRP was liable to be excluded, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has allowed exclusion of 525 days in the CHD-Vann matter and set aside the NCLT's rejection of the plea.
A Bench of Chairperson Justice Ashok Bhushan and Technical Member Barun Mitra observed that the insolvency pertained to a real estate company with several projects, and different orders had been passed from time to time segregating projects from the CIRP. Since the last such segregation concerning CHD-Vann was allowed only on November 21, 2025, “the said period is required to be excluded,” the tribunal held.
Pre-March 2020 Defaults Not Covered By Section 10A Of IBC: NCLAT Delhi
Case Title : Irfan Khan Suspended Director of M/s Western Energetics Pvt. Ltd vs, Rakesh Kumar Goswami Proprietor of Lamsyn Enterprises & Anr
Case Number : Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1392 of 2023 & I.A. No. 4976 of 2023
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 69
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Delhi, on 24 February, held that Section 10A of the IBC cannot bar Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) initiation where the debt had fallen due prior to 25 March 2020, clarifying that dishonour of cheques during the COVID-19 suspension period does not alter the original default date.
The Principal Bench, comprising Judicial Member Justice Mohammad Faiz Alam Khan and Technical Member Naresh Salecha, dismissed an appeal filed by Irfan Khan, suspended director of Western Energetics Pvt. Ltd., challenging the Jaipur Bench of the NCLT's initiation of CIRP under Section 9 of the Code.
No TDS Refund Set Off In Shri Jalaram Rice Industries Liquidation As No Claim Was Filed: NCLAT
Case Title : Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax-3, Ahmedabad Vs Kiran Shah
Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) 1705/2025
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 71
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Delhi has dismissed an appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Ahmedabad. It held that in the liquidation of Shri Jalaram Rice Industries Pvt Ltd, the department could not adjust a TDS refund against an earlier tax demand because it had not filed any claim in the liquidation proceedings. “Appellant having not filed any claim question of claiming set off does not arise,” the bench of Chairperson Justice Ashok Bhushan and Technical Member Barun Mitra observed.
Case Title : Arvind Kumar Vs Beacon Trusteeship Limited & Anr
Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) 171/2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 72
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has recently upheld insolvency proceedings against real estate firm Arcturus Developers Pvt. Ltd., holding that its debentures were never converted into shares and continued to remain financial debt.
A Bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Technical Member Barun Mitra dismissed an appeal filed by the company's suspended director, Arvind Kumar. The case concerned 50,00,000 Optionally Convertible Debentures issued by the company in 2019 to raise funds.
NCLAT Replaces NCLT's Two-Week Deadline With 90 Days For Nobal Buildtech To Pay ₹90 Crore Settlement
Case Title : Harvinder Singh Sikka Vs Nobal Buildtech Pvt. Ltd.
Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) 256/2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 63
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Delhi has given Nobal Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. 90 days to pay Rs 90 crore under a settlement, replacing the two-week window earlier granted by the New Delhi Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal. The New Delhi Bench of the NCLT had revived the company's insolvency process on January 7, 2026 and later extended limited protection only until February 4, 2026. The company had sought more time to complete the settlement.
Modifying that order, a bench of Judicial Member Justice Ashok Bhushan and Technical Member Barun Mitra said sufficient cause had been shown to grant 90 days.
Pre-Existing Dispute In Ledgers: NCLAT Dismisses Drive India's Insolvency Appeal Against Essline
Case Title : Drive India Enterprise Solutions Ltd. Through Its Authorized Representative Vs. Essline Engineers and Consultants Pvt. Ltd.
Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 197 of 2022
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 73
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Delhi has dismissed Drive India Enterprise Solutions Ltd.'s insolvency appeal against Essline Engineers and Consultants Pvt. Ltd., holding that a pre-existing dispute between the parties was real and documented long before the insolvency notice was issued.
A bench of Judicial Member Justices Ashok Bhushan and Technical Member Barun Mitra held:
“The present is a case where notice of dispute was issued by the Corporate Debtor immediately after receiving of the demand notice and materials brought in reply to Section 9 application clearly proves that the plea raised by the Corporate Debtor that it does not owe any amount to the Appellant was supported by its ledgers. In any view of the matter, there were correspondences between the parties as noted above which clearly reflect the pre-existing dispute between the parties.”
NCLT
NCLT Mumbai Allows Saraswat Bank To Make Clarificatory Amendments To Section 7 Petition
Case Title : Saraswat Co-Op. Bank Limited Aaacorp Exim India Private Limited
Case Number : IA/3713/2024 C.P. (IB)/682(MB)2023
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (MUM) 158
On 5 February 2026, the Mumbai Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) allowed Saraswat Co‑operative Bank Limited to amend its pending Section 7 petition against AAACORP Exim India Private Limited to correct the date of default, NPA classification date, and outstanding dues of Rs. 15.59 crore.
The Bench comprising Judicial Member Sushil Mahadeorao Kochey and Technical Member Charanjeet Singh Gulati, held that that such amendments are permitted if they are clarificatory, necessary for effective adjudication, and do not create a new case or prejudice the corporate debtor.
Mere MOU For Flat Allotment Not Financial Debt Without Disbursal To Corporate Debtor: NCLT Mumbai
Case Title : Wescon Housing India Private Limited vs. Mr. Pankaj Ramdas Mathia and Ors. Case Number : IA (I.B.C) No. 4491/MB/2025 in CP (IB) No. 364/MB/2021
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (MUM) 159
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) at Mumbai recently held that a payment made under an MOU for allotment of 3,000 sq ft of FSI in a proposed real estate project does not qualify as a “financial debt” under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 if there is no disbursal to the corporate debtor and no element of time value of money.
A Bench of Judicial Member Ashish Kalia and Technical Member Sanjiv Dutt said, “There is nothing to show that money was disbursed by the Applicant against the consideration for the time value of money so as to be treated as a financial debt under Section 5(8) of the Code.”
Mere Non-Payment Of Ordered Amount Not Civil Contempt, Execution Is Proper Remedy: NCLT Kochi
Case Title : Renahan Vamakesan v. Anish Lawrence and Anr
Case Number : Contempt Petition (IBC)/2/KOB/2023
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (KOC) 160
The National Company Law Tribunal at Kochi has recently observed that mere non-payment of amounts directed under its orders does not automatically amount to civil contempt and that execution proceedings are the appropriate remedy.
A coram of Judicial Member Vinay Goel observed that contempt proceedings, being quasi-criminal in nature, cannot be routinely invoked as a substitute for execution of orders.
Non-Issuance Of NOC By Financial Creditor After Default Cannot Stall Insolvency: NCLT Chandigarh
Case Title : IDBI Trusteeship Services Ltd vs Vatika Ltd
Case Number : IA (I.B.C)/1537(CH)2025 in CP(IB) No. 45/Chd/Hry/2024
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (CHD) 157
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) at Chandigarh has rejected a plea by homebuyers seeking dismissal of insolvency proceedings against Vatika Ltd. The tribunal held that non-issuance of a No Objection Certificate by the debenture trustee, which was required for execution and registration of conveyance deeds in favour of plot buyers, cannot by itself obstruct proceedings under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code once a financial default has occurred.
The matter was heard by Judicial Member Khetrabasi Biswal and Technical Member Shishir Agarwal. The bench observed that issues arising after the occurrence of default cannot dilute the statutory consequences flowing from an admitted default.
Case Title : Insta Capital Pvt Ltd & Ors vs JBS Enterprises Ltd
Case Number : CP(IB)/546/MB/2025
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (MUM) 161
The National Company Law Tribunal at Mumbai has admitted an insolvency petition against JBS Enterprises Ltd, formerly known as JBS Enterprises Private Limited holding that a corporate debtor cannot escape liability merely because loan documents were executed in its earlier name prior to conversion from a private limited company to a public limited company.
A coram of Judicial Member Nilesh Sharma and Technical Member Sameer Kakar said that once the corporate debtor has availed and benefited from financial facilities, it cannot rely on technical defects in its own documentation to defeat proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
Even Without Plea, NCLT Kochi Examines Covid-19 Suspension Bar, Rejects CIRP Pleas
Case Title : Lakshmi Venkateshwara Traders v. KKR Products and Marketing Private Limited Case Number : CP(IB)/39/KOB/2025 & CP(IB)/02/KOB/2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (KOC) 162
Holding that the statutory Covid-period bar under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code must be examined even in the absence of a specific defence, the NCLT Kochi Bench dismissed two insolvency petitions against KKR Products and Marketing Private Limited. The tribunal found that the alleged defaults arose during the pandemic suspension period (Section 10A).
A coram of Judicial Member Vinay Goel examined the applicability of the statutory bar under Section 10A of the IBC even though no formal defence invoking the provision had been raised by the corporate debtor.
MSME Protections Must Be Invoked By Corporate Debtor, Not Personal Guarantors: NCLT Kochi
Case Title : Tata Capital Limited v. Mr. Jinu Varghese
Case Number : CP(IBC)/30/KOB/2025 & CP(IBC)/31/KOB/2025
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (KOC) 166
The National Company Law Tribunal, Kochi Bench, has held that benefits under the MSMED Act, 2006 and the RBI MSME restructuring framework must be specifically invoked by the corporate debtors. Personal guarantors have no independent right to claim such relief.
A Bench comprising Judicial Member Vinay Goel admitted insolvency petitions filed by Tata Capital Limited against personal guarantors Jinu Varghese and Geeba Kolliyelil Jenny and declared a moratorium in their respect.
Case Title : OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd v. AKMG Alloys Pvt Ltd
Case Number : CP(IBC)/282(CHE)/2021
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (KOC) 167
Admitting a power generator's insolvency plea against its industrial consumer, the National Company Law Tribunal, Chennai, has held that a company cannot escape liability for electricity dues by claiming the power was consumed by its lessee. The tribunal ruled that liability under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code flows from privity of contract, not from actual usage of services.
A coram of Judicial Member Jyoti Kumar Tripathi and Technical Member Ravichandran Ramasamy admitted the Section 9 petition filed by OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd over unpaid electricity dues arising from a Power Supply Agreement dated April 1, 2018.
TDS On Interest Alone Not Enough To Cross Insolvency Threshold: NCLT Chandigarh
Case Title : Wild dreams Trading Company Pvt.Ltd v. Ascendancy Financial Services Pvt. Ltd.
Case Number : CP (IB) No. 335/Chd/J&K/2024
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (KOC) 168
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) at Chandigarh has dismissed a Section 7 CIRP plea after holding that deduction of TDS on alleged interest cannot be treated as an acknowledgment of liability to cross the statutory threshold under Section 4 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
The coram of Judicial Member Khetrabasi Biswal and Technical Member Shishir Agarwal was hearing a petition filed by Wild Dreams Trading Company Pvt. Ltd. seeking initiation of CIRP against Ascendancy Financial Services Pvt. Ltd.
Case Title : State Bank of India v. Mr. Mallampati Madhu.
Case Number : Company Petition IB/144/95/HBD/2023
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT(HYD) 169
The Hyderabad Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) declined to admit a petition filed by the State Bank of India (SBI) seeking initiation of insolvency proceedings against Mallampati Madhu, the personal guarantor of TN (DK) Expressways Limited, holding that such action would be inequitable while a substantial arbitral award of Rs. 288.96 crores in its favour remains under challenge and unrealised.
A Bench comprising Judicial Member Rajeev Bhardwaj and Technical Member Sanjay Puri observed: “In view of the arbitral award (of Rs. 288.96 crores) in favour of the Principal Borrower being substantially higher than the amount of default (of Rs. 138.27 crores)… initiation of CIRP against the guarantor would be discriminatory vis-à-vis the Applicant.”
NCLT Mumbai Admits CIRP Plea Against Baggit India Pvt Ltd Over ₹1.11 Crore Operational Debt
Case Title : Sunrise Global Tradelinks vs Baggit India Pvt Ltd
Case Number : CP (IB)/764/2025
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (MUM) 171
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) at Mumbai had admitted an operational creditor's insolvency petition against Baggit India Private Limited, an Indian handbags and fashion accessories company over a debt of Rs 1,11,84,020.
A coram of Judicial Member Nilesh Sharma and Technical Member Sameer Kakar held that the application filed by Sunrise Global Tradelinks was complete in all respects and that default stood established.