SUPREME COURT
Case Title : PRERNA SINGH VERSUS COMMITTEE OF CREDITORS & ORS.
Case Number : Civil Appeal No. 2569 of 2022
The Supreme Court of India on Monday directed the Superintendent of Police, Hapur, to break open locks and hand over complete possession of warehouse premises to landlord Prerna Singh, coming down heavily on Naveen Kumar Jain, the Resolution Professional (RP) of Xalta Food and Beverages Pvt Ltd and holding his conduct "contemptuous." A bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Vijay Bishnoi issued immediate directions after being told that despite earlier orders, only partial possession had been handed over.
Case Title : Alpha Corp Development Private Limited versus Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (GNIDA) and others
Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1526 OF 2023
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz SC 174
The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday observed that the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (GNIDA) was largely responsible for the situation surrounding stalled projects of Earth Infrastructures Ltd., including the Earth Towne project in Greater Noida, faulting it for failing to monitor development and allowing the situation to worsen. “We are, therefore, of the opinion that GNIDA contributed greatly to the present imbroglio by its persistent inaction and ineptitude all through. Having executed lease deeds for development of the lands, it failed to keep track of and monitor the development being undertaken on such lands to ensure timely completion thereof within the stipulated period of seven years. We may also note that long prior to initiation of the CIRP proceedings against EIL, the CD, GNIDA was informed by the aggrieved home/office space buyers of the tardy progress in the construction of the projects but failed to take necessary coercive steps against the lessees and/or the developer, EIL”
Adani Ent. Files Caveat In Supreme Court After NCLAT Upholds Approval Of Its Resolution Plan For JAL
Case Title : Adani Enterprises Ltd vs Vedanta Ltd
Case Number : Caveat No. 8418 of 2026
Adani Enterprises has filed a caveat before the Supreme Court anticipating an appeal by Vedanta Ltd against the NCLAT judgment upholding the approval of Adani's nearly ₹14,535 crore resolution plan for debt-laden Jaiprakash Associates Ltd (JAL). The caveat ensures that in case Vedanta files an appeal, no interim order is passed without first hearing Adani Enterprises. In its May 5, 2026 judgment, the NCLAT dismissed Vedanta's appeals challenging the approval of Adani Enterprises' resolution plan and held that under the resolution framework adopted for JAL, the Committee of Creditors was not bound to approve a plan merely because it carried the highest net present value or scored highest under the evaluation matrix.
Case Title : SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA VERSUS PANCARD CLUBS LTD & ORS.
Case Number : Civil Appeal No.558/2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz SC 178
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to reopen SEBI's challenge to the Pancard Clubs insolvency proceedings. It upheld an NCLAT order holding that SEBI's fraud allegations fell outside the scope of proceedings on condonation of delay. A Bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Vijay Bishnoi dismissed SEBI's appeal against the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal's November 3, 2025 order rejecting its recall plea.
Case Title : Dhanlaxmi Bank Ltd vs Mohammed Javed Sultan & Ors
Case Number : CIVIL APPEAL No. 7184 OF 2022
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz SC 180
The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed an appeal filed by Dhanlaxmi Bank Ltd against an NCLAT order that had set aside insolvency proceedings against Emerald Mineral Exim Pvt Ltd. The court held that the dispute arising from a commercial property transaction was predominantly contractual in nature and not a straightforward financial debt-default case warranting initiation of CIRP under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
HIGH COURT
Case Title : Jaideep Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
Case Number : WP No. 13632 of 2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz HC (MP) 31
The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur has recently stayed the execution of an arrest warrant in recovery proceedings arising from a RERA order against a real estate developer undergoing insolvency, noting that enforcing civil jail despite a subsisting moratorium would cause serious prejudice. A bench of Justice Sanjeev S. Kalgaonkar observed, “The petitioner would be seriously prejudice, if the order regarding civil jail is executed in furtherance of the warrant of arrest despite there being moratorium stay order passed by the NCLT, Special Indore Bench in his favour. Therefore, it is directed that the execution in furtherance of order dated 09.04.2026 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Kolar is stayed till next date of hearing,”
Case Title : Kaizen Power Limited Vs Andhra Pradesh Industrial Corporation Limited
Case Number : Commercial Court Appeal No 3/2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz HC(TEL) 28
The Telangana High Court on 15 April set aside a Commercial Court order that had vacated interim protection granted to Kaizen Power Limited in relation to its lease dispute with the Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation (APIIC). A Division Bench of Justices Moushumi Bhattacharya and Gadi Praveen Kumar held that the Commercial Court proceeded on an erroneous understanding of the effect of the IBC moratorium and allowed the appeal, directing that arbitration proceedings be resumed without further delay, while restoring the interim protection earlier granted.
RTO Cannot Demand Pre-Liquidation Motor Vehicle Tax From IBC Auction Purchasers: Bombay High Court
Case Title : My Ideal Transport and another Vs Transport Commissioner Maharashtra and others
Case Number : WRIT PETITION NO.3237 OF 2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 258
On 22 April, the Bombay High Court, allowing a writ petition filed by My Ideal Transport, held that Regional Transport Offices (RTOs) cannot demand pre-liquidation Motor Vehicle Tax (MVT) dues from auction purchasers of vehicles sold during liquidation under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). A Division Bench of Justices Manish Pitale and Shreeram V. Shirsat reiterated that statutory authorities must lodge their claims before the liquidator and have them resolved under the IBC's waterfall mechanism, rather than recover them from successful auction purchasers.
Case Title : JM Financial Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. Vs Registrar, National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench and another
Case Number : WRIT PETITION (L) NO.13026 OF 2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 259
On 30 April, the Bombay High Court directed the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai to constitute a Special Bench and dispose of JM Financial Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd.'s Section 7 petition against Shubh Hospitality Private Ltd. by 30 June 2026, and expressed strong disapproval of how the Tribunal handled the matter. A Division Bench of Justices Manish Pitale and Shreeram V. Shirsat emphasised that delays at the NCLT defeat the time-bound framework of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), and directed immediate steps to ensure pronouncement of a long-reserved order.
Case Title : Omkaram Venkata Ramana Vs The Union of India & Ors
Case Number : WRIT PETITION NO: 8420 of 2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz HC(APH) 36
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by businessman Omkaram Venkata Ramana challenging the Bank of India's decision to classify his group companies' loan accounts as Non-Performing Assets (NPA). The court held that the petition sought to bypass proceedings already pending under the SARFAESI Act and Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). "In our considered opinion there cannot be any blanket orders passed as is prayed in this writ petition, which itself is not entertainable as such. Petitioner seeks to bypass all pending proceedings under SARFAESI Act as well as IBC and also seeks that this Court should ignore passing of order, dated 16.12.2025 in Crl.P.No.8044 of 2023 whereby criminal proceedings initiated by him against Bank officials have been quashed,” the court observed.
NCLT Proceedings Time Excludable Under Section 14 Limitation Act: Calcutta High Court
Case Title : JONES LANG LASALLE PROPERTY CONSULTANTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED -VERSUS- M. A. LEASING AND CONSRUCTION PVT. LTD. AND ORS.
Case Number : C.S. (COM) 171/2025
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz HC (CAL) 109
The Calcutta High Court on 6 May held that the time spent prosecuting insolvency proceedings before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) is liable to be excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, even where a Section 9 application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) is rejected on the ground of pre-existing dispute. Justice Aniruddha Roy allowed a commercial suit filed by Jones Lang LaSalle Property Consultants (India) Pvt Ltd against M. A. Leasing and Construction Pvt Ltd and its directors seeking recovery of unpaid professional fees, and directed exclusion of the period spent before the NCLT while computing limitation.
NCLAT
Case Title : Vedanta Ltd. Vs. Bhuvan Madan Resolution Professional of Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. & Ors.
Case Number : Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 552 & 553 of 2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 196
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Delhi on Monday dismissed Vedanta Limited's appeal challenging the approval of Adani Enterprises Limited's resolution plan for Jaiprakash Associates Limited. The tribunal upheld the Committee of Creditors' decision despite Vedanta's higher bid. A bench of Chairperson Ashok Bhushan and Technical Member Braun Mitra affirmed the March 17 order of the Allahabad bench of the National Company Law Tribunal, which had approved Adani Enterprises Limited's plan while rejecting Vedanta Limited's proposal.
NCLAT Rejects Insolvency Plea Over Disputed, Time-Barred Advance Refund Claim
Case Title : Geeta Sugars v. The Indian Sugars and Refiners Limited
Case Number : TA (AT) No.192/2021 (CA (AT) (Ins) No.1405/2019)
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 194
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Chennai, has dismissed an appeal filed by Geeta Sugars against The Indian Sugars and Refiners Ltd., upholding the rejection of its insolvency plea over a claim for a refund of advance paid for sugar, where the remaining quantity was not supplied. A bench of Judicial Member Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma and Technical Member Jatindranath Swain held that the claim was both disputed and time-barred.
NCLAT Declines Travel Permission To Bankrupt Individual As Basis For Travel Has Ceased
Case Title : Sunil Surendrabhai Kakkad v. Samir Ganeshbhai Marathe & Anr.
Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 349 of 2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 197
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at New Delhi has declined to grant relief to a bankrupt individual seeking permission to travel to the UAE, holding that once the work contract cited to justify such travel had expired, “the very basis” for seeking permission no longer survived. The Tribunal was dealing with an appeal filed by Sunil Surendrabhai Kakkad, who was declared bankrupt on September 12, 2025, and was consequently barred from travelling abroad without prior permission of the Adjudicating Authority.
NCLAT Upholds Insolvency Admission Against JV Partner As Claim Arose From Supply Obligation
Case Title : Amarendra Mohapatra Vs Daga Power Systems & Engineers Pvt. Ltd. & Anr
Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) 1660/2025
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 199
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal at Delhi has upheld the admission of insolvency proceedings against ASB Energy Systems & Construction Pvt. Ltd., holding that unpaid dues for supplies made by its joint venture partner qualify as operational debt. A coram of Chairperson Justice Ashok Bhushan and Technical Member Barun Mitra observed that the case was about unpaid dues for supplies, not profit sharing between joint venture partners.
Case Title : Om Logistics Limited v. Bakul Casting Private Limited
Case Number : I.A. No. 6569, 6639 & 6641 of 2025 in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1687 of 2025
CITATION : 2026LLBiz NCLAT 202
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”) at Delhi has recently dismissed an appeal filed by Om Logistics Limited after refusing to condone a delay of 198 days in refiling. The tribunal rejected the company's explanation that its authorised signatory was unavailable till April 13, 2025 due to personal exigencies. A bench of Judicial Member Justice Ashok Bhushan and Technical Member Indevar Pandey observed that Om Logistics Limited could not justify the prolonged delay merely because one authorised signatory was unavailable.
Case Title : Hotel Horizon Pvt. Ltd. v. Tea4Health Pvt. Ltd.
Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 1443 of 2023
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 201
The Principle Bench of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) in New Delhi on 6 May 2026 held that disputes relating to unusable commercial premises, disruption of essential services, and failure to maintain operational infrastructure constitute a genuine pre-existing dispute sufficient to reject a petition under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). Judicial Member Justice Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan and Technical Member Naresh Salecha upheld the order of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai Bench-IV, which had rejected the Section 9 application filed by Hotel Horizon Private Limited against Tea4Health Private Limited.
NCLAT Delhi Refuses CIRP Against Indorama Ventures, Holds Pre-Existing Disputes Bar Section 9 Plea
Case Title : Rattan Singh Builders Private Limited Vs Indorama Ventures Yarns Private Limited Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) 453/2026
CITATION : 2026LLBiz NCLAT 203
The New Delhi Bench of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) on 6 May held that a Section 9 application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) cannot be maintained where genuine pre-existing disputes exist between the parties regarding contractual performance, liquidated damages and statutory deductions. Chairperson Justice Ashok Bhushan and Technical Member Indevar Pandey dismissed the appeal filed by Rattan Singh Builders Pvt. Ltd. (RSB) against Indorama Ventures Yarns Pvt. Ltd. (IVYPL) and upheld the Mumbai NCLT's order dated 14 January 2026 rejecting initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).
Case Title : M. D. Devcon Private Limited Vs Kedar Parshuram Mulye & Ors
Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) 1370/2024
CITATION : 2026LLBiz NCLAT 204
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has recently dismissed a challenge by a project homebuyer to the insolvency proceedings against M.D. Devcon Pvt Ltd. It held that the two allottees who initiated the case had ceased to be homebuyers after cancelling their allotment and seeking a refund and were therefore not required to meet the threshold applicable to real estate allottees filing insolvency pleas.
NCLT
Case Title : Shreenathji Rasayan Pvt. Ltd v. Mr. Shrenik Ashokkumar Morakha and ors.
Case Number : IA No. 833(Ahm) 2020 in CP(IB) No. 463 of 2019
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (AHM) 411
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Ahmedabad, has recentlydirected Shreenathji Rasayan Pvt. Ltd., the successful resolution applicant of Morakhia Copper & Alloys Pvt. Ltd., to file a complaint against a Chartered Accountant before the National Financial Reporting Authority (NFRA) and the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) for assisting in the falsification of the company's accounts.
NCLT Bengaluru Admits Millennium Starch Into CIRP Despite Technical Defects In Insolvency Plea
Case Title : Axis Bank v. Millennium Starch India Pvt Ltd
Case Number : CP(IB) No. 22/BB/2025
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT(BEN) 412
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) at Bengaluru has admitted a ₹39.19 crore insolvency plea filed by Axis Bank against Millennium Starch India Private Limited, holding that procedural defects in the petition did not prejudice the company and could be cured during the proceedings. “Even if the defect remained, no prejudice is shown to have occurred to the respondent who has been afforded sufficient opportunity to file reply/objections to the petition and address arguments post service of notice. The objection therefore, has melted on satisfaction and does not jeopardise the stance of respondent on any count.”, it observed.
NCLT Kochi Admits Insolvency Plea Against Inditrade Capital Filed By MediBuddy Parent Company
Case Title : M/s Phasorz Technologies Private Limited v. M/s Inditrade Capital Limited
Case Number : CP(IBC)/6/KOB/2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT(KOC) 413
The Kochi Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal, on 6 May admitted an insolvency petition filed by Phasorz Technologies Private Limited, which operates the healthcare platform MediBuddy, against Inditrade Capital Limited (ITCL) over an alleged default of about Rs. 3.58 crore.
Case Title : Cotton Corporation of India Ltd Vs Ajit Kumar
Case Number : IA/548(AHM)2021 In CP{IB) 625 of 2018
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (AHM) 414
The Ahmedabad Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on 27 April held that a claim linked to pending proceedings and subject to a subsisting stay cannot be treated as a crystallised debt under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and may only be recognised at a notional value in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). Judicial Member Shammi Khan and Technical Member Sanjeev Sharma dismissed an interlocutory application filed under Section 60(5) of the Code, while directing that the claim be admitted at a notional value of Rs. 1 instead of being reduced to nil.
NCLT Ahmedabad Admits Aphelion Finance's ₹6.72 Crore Section 7 Petition Against Osia Hyper Retail
Case Title : Apheloin Finance Private Limited Vs Osia Hyper Retail Limited
Case Number : C.P.(IB)/220(AHM)2025
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (AHM) 415
The Ahmedabad Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on 28 April admitted a Section 7 petition filed by Aphelion Finance Pvt. Ltd. against Osia Hyper Retail Ltd, thereby initiating the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) and appointing Ritesh Prakash Adatiya as Interim Resolution Professional. Judicial Member Chitra Hankare and Technical Member Dr V.G. Venkata Chalapathy held that once financial debt and default are shown through sanction letters, credit facility agreements, and guarantees, a Section 7 petition under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is maintainable and must be admitted if statutory requirements are met.
NCLT Guwahati Holds No Straightjacket Definition For Fraudulent Trading Under Section 66 IBC
Case Title : Mukut Chandra Deka v. JSB Entrade Pvt Ltd.
Case Number : IA (IBC)/48/GB/2022 CP (IB)/19/GB/2021
In a significant ruling on the scope of Section 66 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, the Guwahati National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on 30 April held that there is no exhaustive or straightjacket test to determine what constitutes fraudulent or wrongful trading. Judicial Member Justice Rammurti Kushawaha and Technical Member Yogendra Kumar Singh were hearing an application filed by the Resolution Professional of JSB Entrade Pvt. Ltd. against the suspended directors, promoter, and related parties of the corporate debtor.
Former Director Liable To Refund Diverted Rental Income Received During CIRP: NCLT Mumbai
Case Title : Ganesh Venkata Siva Rama Krishna Remani v. Puneet P. Bhatia & Ors.
Case Number : IA 4016 of 2025 in CP (IB) No. 280(MB)2023
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (MUM) 416
The Mumbai Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on 29 April held that a former director who diverted rental income from properties of the corporate debtor during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) is liable to restore the amounts to the insolvency estate. Technical Member Prabhat Kumar and Judicial Member Sushil Mahadeorao Kochey allowed an application filed by the Resolution Professional in the CIRP of Barracks Retail India Pvt. Ltd., admitted on a Section 7 petition filed by ASREC (India) Limited, against Puneet Bhatia, Respondent No.1 and other respondents.
SARFAESI, DRT Proceedings Do Not Bar IBC Action Against Personal Guarantor: NCLT Mumbai
Case Title : Canara Bank v. Shweta Deepak Patel and Ors
Case Number : C.P. (IB) No.377/NCLT/MB/2025 with IA(I.B.C) No.2976/NCLT/MB/2025 CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (MUM) 418
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) in Mumbai has recently held that proceedings under the SARFAESI Act and pending recovery proceedings before the Debt Recovery Tribunal do not bar insolvency proceedings against a personal guarantor to a corporate debtor under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. A coram of Judicial Member Nilesh Sharma and Technical Member Sameer Kakar passed the ruling while admitting an insolvency application filed by Canara Bank against Shewta Deepak Patel, personal guarantor to Swaminarayan Diamonds Private Limited.
MSME Protections Cannot Override IBC Once Debt And Default Are Established: NCLT Mumbai
Case Title : Buldana Urban Cooperative Credit Society Limited Buldana v. Amar Seeds Private Ltd
Case Number : C.P.(IB)/767(MB)2025
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (MUM) 417
The Mumbai Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has admitted insolvency proceedings against Amar Seeds Private Limited, holding that its status as a Micro, Small and Medium Enterprise would not bar initiation of proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code once financial debt and default were established.
NCLT Mumbai Approves Mantra Properties' Rs 201 Crore Resolution Plan For Nirmal Lifestyle
Case Title : Amit Vijay Karia vs Beacon Trusteeship Limited & Ors
Case Number : I.A. 783/2026 In C.P.(IB)/1150 (MB)/C-III/2022
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (MUM) 421
The National Company Law Tribunal's Mumbai Bench has approved a resolution plan involving an infusion of Rs 201 crore by Mantra Properties and Developers Pvt Ltd for Nirmal Lifestyle (Mulund) Pvt Ltd, which has been undergoing corporate insolvency resolution proceedings since July 11, 2023. A Bench of Judicial Member Lakshmi Gurung and Technical Member Hariharan Neelakanta Iyer passed the order on April 29, 2026, allowing an application filed by Resolution Professional Amit Vijay Karia under Section 30(6) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code seeking approval of the plan.
IBC Individual Insolvency Process Applies To Personal Guarantors, Not Co-Borrowers: NCLT Jaipur
Case Title : Ankit Baldwa v. Ugro Capital Limited and Ors
Case Number : IA(IBC) No. 348/JPR/2025 in CP No.(IB)-47/94/JPR/2025
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (JAI) 419
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) at Jaipur has dismissed an insolvency plea after holding that the individual insolvency framework under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code applies only to personal guarantors of corporate debtors and not co-borrowers. “In view of the scheme of the Code, we are of the opinion that the legislature in its wisdom extended the application of individual insolvency process only to the Personal Guarantors to the Corporate Debtor,” the tribunal said.
NCLT Ahmedabad Disposes Gensol's Insolvency Case Against Mindra EV After ₹1.5 Crore Settlement
Case Title : Gensol EV Lease Limited v. Mindra EV Private Limited
Case Number : CP(IB)/459(AHM) 2025
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT(AHM) 423
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) at Ahmedabad has recently disposed of as infructuous insolvency proceedings initiated by Gensol EV Lease Limited against Mindra EV Private Limited after the parties entered into a settlement agreement. A coram of Judicial Member Shammi Khan and Technical Member Sanjeev Sharma passed the order. Gensol had filed a petition under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 seeking initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against Mindra EV Private Limited over an alleged operational debt of ₹1,61,39,864.
Case Title : AU Small Finance Bank Vs Aviral Bio Tech & Fertilizers Pvt Ltd
Case Number : IA/317(MP)2024 in CP(IB)/49(MP)2023
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (IND) 424
The Indore bench of the National Company Law Tribunal has allowed AU Small Finance Bank Limited to join the insolvency proceedings against Aviral Bio Tech & Fertilisers Pvt. Ltd. Holding that the bank, which had extended a vehicle loan to the company, qualifies as a financial creditor, the Tribunal said its objections deserved consideration. “It is not in dispute that the Applicant has extended financial assistance to the Corporate Applicant by way of a vehicle loan, thereby qualifying as a Financial Creditor within the meaning of the Code.”
Show Cause Notice Does Not Create Enforceable Debt Claimable In Liquidation: NCLT Ahmedabad
Case Title : The Commissioner of Customs Vs Arvind Gaudana
Case Number : IA/80(AHM)2026 in C.P.(IB)/119(AHM)2022
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT(AHM) 425
The Ahmedabad bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has recently held that a show cause notice is merely a proposal to determine liability and does not create an enforceable debt while dismissing the Commissioner of Customs' delayed Rs 1.63 crore claim against Spel Granito Pvt. Ltd. in liquidation. Judicial Member Shammi Khan and Technical Member Sanjeev Sharma observed: “A Show Cause Notice is only a proposal to determine liability and does not create an enforceable or adjudicated debt as on the liquidation commencement date.”, the tribunal held.
NCLT Mumbai Holds Water Supply And Service Charges To RIICO Not CIRP Costs
Case Title : Rajasthan State Industrial Development & Investment Corporation Limited Versus Shrivallabh Pittie Industries Ltd. & Ors.
Case Number : IA IBC 567/2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (MUM) 430
Invoice Dues, Supply Advances Can Be Clubbed As Operational Debt Under IBC: NCLT Chennai
Case Title : Enmas India Pvt. Ltd. v. Sabash Engineering (Chennai) Pvt. Ltd.
Case Number : CP(IB)/271(CHE)/2024
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (CHE) 429
The Chennai Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on 28 April held that outstanding invoice dues and advance payments made towards supply of goods can be clubbed together as “operational debt” under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) for the purpose of maintaining a petition under Section 9 of the IBC. Technical Member Venkataraman Subramaniam and Judicial Member Sanjiv Jain admitted the application filed by Enmas India Pvt. Ltd. seeking initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Sabash Engineering, finding that the statutory threshold under Section 4 of the IBC stood satisfied.
Case Title : Mfar Constructions Private Limited v. Canopy Estates Private Limited
Case Number : C.P. (IB) No.21/BB/2020
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (BEN) 431
The Bengaluru Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on 28 April held that a separate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) for another real estate project cannot be initiated through interlocutory applications in an already admitted insolvency proceeding. Judicial Member Justice Sunil Kumar Aggarwal and Technical Member Radhakrishna Sreepada ruled that the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) permits initiation of CIRP only through independent applications under Sections 7, 9 or 10, and not through miscellaneous proceedings in a pending case.
Case Title : Bhaskar Gopal Shetty (Liquidator) v. DCB Bank & Ors. in Raman Enterprises v. Mediaman Infotech Private Limited
Case Number : IA 1686 of 2024 in CP (IB) No. 1817(MB)/2019
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (MUM) 433
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) at Mumbai has criticised the erstwhile Resolution Professional in the insolvency of Mediaman Infotech Private Limited, observing that his attempt to extend the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process beyond 180 days appeared aimed at continuing his assignment as Resolution Professional.
Case Title : Mr. Hasti Mal Kachhara, RP of Nagraj Alloys Pvt. Ltd. v. Niraj Mangal Meshram & Ors.
Case Number : IA 5256 of 2024 in CP (IB) No. 89 of 2022
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (MUM) 434
The Mumbai Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on 7 May held that the write-off of inventory worth Rs. 10,83,69,000 by Nagraj Alloys Private Limited during CIRP was a fraudulent transaction intended to conceal non-existent stock and defraud creditors, thereby attracting liability under Section 66(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
Case Title : Peerless Hospitex Hospital and Research Center Limited v. Abhijit Hazarika and Ors
Case Number : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (GUA) 436
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (GUA) 436
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) at Guwahati has permitted Peerless Hospitex Hospital and Research Center Limited, the successful resolution applicant for Ayursundra Hospital (Guwahati) Private Limited, to prosecute a pending avoidance application after the conclusion of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process by substituting the Resolution Professional. The tribunal held that the approved resolution plan, read with subsequent implementation decisions, contemplated continuation of such proceedings.
Decision On Corporate Debtor's Leased Premises Falls Within CoC's Commercial Wisdom: NCLT Kochi
Case Title : G Vinayan v. CS Narendar Reddy Banala
Case Number : IA(IBC)/75/KOB/2026 in CP(IBC)/5/KOB/2024
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (KOC) 435
On 8 May 2026, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Kochi held that the decision on whether leased premises occupied by a corporate debtor should be retained or vacated during CIRP or liquidation falls within the commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors (CoC). Judicial Member Vinay Goel passed the order and disposed of the application by directing the CoC to convene a meeting within 15 days and take a considered decision on the issue of continuation or vacation of the premises.
Pending Avoidance Applications No Bar To Dissolution Of Corporate Debtor: NCLT Hyderabad
Case Title : In the matter of Urban Farmart India Private Limited Filed by Govada Venkata Subbarao, Liquidator M/s Urban Farmart India Pvt Ltd
Case Number : CP (IB) No. IA (IBC) (DIS) No. 3/2026 IN CP (IB) No: 273/10/HDB/2022 CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (HYD) 437
The Hyderabad Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on 6 May held that pendency of avoidance applications, including those relating to preferential, undervalued, fraudulent and extortionate (PUFE) transactions, cannot preclude dissolution of a corporate debtor under Section 54 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, particularly in view of Regulation 44A of the Liquidation Process Regulations.
Case Title : IDBI Bank Limited vs Lanco Infratech Limited
Case Number : CP (IB) No. 111/7/HDB/2017 AND IA (IBC) 974/2024 in CP (IB) No. 111/7/HDB/2017
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (HYD) 438
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Hyderabad, has held that while liquidation rules allow a liquidator to appoint professionals to assist in the process, that power cannot be used to outsource the liquidator's own statutory duties or claim payments beyond the prescribed fee structure. Applying this principle, the tribunal directed Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu India LLP to refund ₹7.48 crore to Lanco Infratech's liquidation estate.