SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(NCLT) 2582

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
Shri Manni Sankariah Shanmuga Sundaram, MEMBER (JUDICIAL), Dr. Sanjeev Ranjan, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)
M/s. Cloud Retail Solutions Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Mr. Neeraj Malhotra – Respondent
Company Petition No. (IB)-354 (ND) 2023 | Intervention Petition/3/ND/2024



Advocates:
For the Applicant: Mr. Shivam Sehgal, Adv., Mr. Yogesh Jagia, Mr. Chandan Dutta, Advs.
For the Respondents: Mr. Sahil Tagotra, Mr. Sujay Jain, Mr. Pratik Guarav, Advs., Ms. Bharvi Thakur, LLP, Mr. Yatharth Jain, Advs., Ms. Sonali Karwasra, Adv., Mr. Abhishek Puri, Adv., Ms. Surbhi Gupta, Ms. Sahil Grewal, Advs.

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code cannot be misused to evade legitimate creditor claims or liabilities; fraudulent applications undermine the integrity of the resolution process.

Headnote:(A) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 10 - Initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process - Application dismissed due to malafide intent and suppression of material facts; failure to disclose comprehensive financial statements leading to questions on fund utilization and alleged financial distress (Paras 12, 14, 19).

(B) Fraudulent Initiation of Proceedings - Abuse of process by filing an IBC application not for genuine resolution but to evade liabilities; application dismissed with no costs due to fraudulent intent and failure to comply with statutory requirements (Paras 10, 18).

Facts of the case:
The Corporate Applicant engaged in multiple borrowing activities without intending to repay, leading to defaults on various agreements, while also filing IBC applications to delay creditor actions (Paras 2, 3).

Findings of Court:
The application is found to be devoid of merit and represents a significant abuse of the insolvency process, which should not protect the corporate debtor from legitimate creditor claims (Paras 19).

Issues: There were significant concerns regarding the bona fide nature of the insolvency application, with evidence suggesting attempts to mislead the court regarding financial stability (Paras 12, 18).

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the Code is intended for genuine insolvency resolution; misuse for personal gain is a clear ground for application dismissal (Para 19).

Result: Application dismissed.

Table of Content
1. corporate debtor's financial defaults and breaches. (Para 2 , 3)
2. allegations of fraud in borrowing processes. (Para 4 , 5 , 10)
3. court's scrutiny of intent behind insolvency filing. (Para 7 , 12 , 18)
4. application dismissal based on lack of genuine relief seeking. (Para 11 , 19)

ORDER

PER: DR. SANJEEV RANJAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

1. That the present intervention application filed by Mr. Neeraj Malhotra, proprietor of M/s Vista Buildwell before this Hon’ble Tribunal in the present matter bearing IB 354(ND)/2023 with the following prayer :

i. allow this application and thereafter, impleaded the Intervener Applicant Financial creditor as one of the Intervener Applicant /Financial creditor in the present IBC Proceedings pending against the petitioner / corporate deЬtor in the interest of justice;

ii. to рау the entire dues of the intervener Applicant from the assets of the petitioner / corporate debtor.

iii. to grant relief as just and proper in the interest of justice and deemed fit to this Hon’blе Тribunal in accordance with the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case as mentioned in the instant application, which are just and necessary for adjudication, are as follows: -

a. That the Intervener/ applicant i.e., Vista Buildwell entered into the lease agreement on 16.01.2021 but the said agreement was effective from 31.12.2020. The petitioner / corporate deЬtor agreed to take the property on lease for а period i.e., till 31.12.2027. There was lock in period in the said lease for 36 months and it was а bounding condition upon both the parties the intervener applicant i.e., Vista Buildwell and the petitioner / corporate deЬtor cannot terminate the lease within the lock in period at their own will and arbitrarily.

b. That the petitioner / corporate deЬtor started defaulting in payment of the rent/ lease amount that was fixed as Rs.2,04,120/- till November, 2022 and bound to рау the rent with in the lock in period as per the agreement and for the said amount the petitioner / corporate deЬtor are legally bound to make the payment to the Intervener applicant of the rent agreed vide the rent agreement and for the lock in period.

c. The petitioner/corporate debtor, in partial discharge of its liability, issued two cheques bearing Nos. 306836 and 744156 dated 09.08.2022 and 22.10.2022 respectively, drawn on HSBC Bank, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. However, both cheques were dishonoured upon presentation, with the remarks “INSUFFICIENT FUNDS” and “PAYMENT STOPPED BY THE DRAWER” respectively. The stoppage of payment without the consent of all directors is not feasible under standard corporate practice, thereby rendering all directors jointly and severally liable for such dishonour.

d. The Applicant submitted that the issuance of said cheques with knowledge of insufficient funds and subsequent payment stoppage clearly indicates mala fide intent and an attempt to defraud the Intervener applicant, Vista Buildwell. The petitioner/corporate debtor has been a habitual defaulter in paying rent as per the lease agreement dated 16.01.2021, having failed to meet its obligations under the lock- in period of 36 months. Consequently, the petitioner is liable to pay an outstanding amount of ₹44,41,323/- along with interest at 36% per annum, GST, and other statutory dues. Despite being informed and 3contacted immediately upon dishonour, the petitioner failed to remedy the default or provide justification, further evidencing dishonest conduct. The filing of the present petition by the petitioner/corporate debtor is a calculated attempt to evade lawful liability not only to Vista Buildwell but also to other creditors and the general public.

3. We have heard Ld. Counsel for the Intervenor. The relevant documents annexed with the respective submissions have been examined.

4. It has come to light that the Corporate Debtor had entered into various agreements with multiple parties, including the Operational Creditor and

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top