Back
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
N. Seshasayee, J, Arun Baroka, Technical Member
Nimai Gautam Shah – Appellant
Versus
Raj Radhe Finance Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. rp's role and compliance with cirp regulations. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. sra's financial capacity and plan viability. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. coc's commercial wisdom and scrutiny duties. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. limited role of adjudicating authority under sec.31 ibc. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 14) |
| 5. detecting fraud and ensuring ibc process integrity. (Para 16 , 17) |
| 6. asset depletion and flawed information memorandum. (Para 18 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 7. commercial wisdom requires full information disclosure. (Para 25 , 26) |
| 8. dismiss appeals and confirm liquidation order. (Para 27 , 28) |
COMMON JUDGEMENT
Per Justice N. Seshasayee, Member (Judicial)
1.1 These appeals are preferred against the Order of the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT-I, Ahmedabad), dated 23.06.2025, in C.P.(IB) 69 of 2023, rejecting a resolution plan which the CoC had approved.
1.2 M/s Zep Infratech Ltd., the CD, underwent a CIRP process. It was partially successful in that the CoC had approved the resolution plan, but not the Adjudicating Authority. The CoC is aggrieved for whatever they along with the other creditors are entitled to receive is still at a distance. The Resolution Professional, someone who under the scheme of IBC is
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
