Back
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Indevar Pandey, Judicial Member
Malharshanti Enterprises – Appellant
Versus
Naresh Sevantilal Shah – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of afcan and can cirps (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. sra ineligible under section 29a due to can cirp (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 3. appellant qualifies as person aggrieved (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 4. appellant lacks locus; sra eligible (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 5. rp supports plan approval; no ineligibility (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40) |
| 6. framing issues on locus and section 29a (Para 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50) |
| 7. person aggrieved must be cirp stakeholder (Para 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55) |
| 8. appellant judgments inapplicable to facts (Para 56) |
| 9. no section 29a(c) disqualification without npa (Para 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61) |
| 10. no section 29a(e) without formal director disqualification (Para 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66) |
| 11. no new grounds; plan implemented and upheld (Para 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72) |
| 12. appeal dismissed for lack of locus (Para 73) |
JUDGMENT
(20th March, 2026)
INDEVAR PANDEY, MEMBER (T)
The present Appeal has been preferred under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to Code) by Malharshanti Enterprises, (Appellant
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
