Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(NCLT) 3868
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
SHRI SUNIL KUMAR AGGARWAL, SHRI RADHAKRISHNA SREEPADA, JJ
M/s. Total Solutions Intec Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
M/s. Buoyant Technology Constellation Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
C.P. (IB)No.98/BB/2024
For the Applicant: Shri M.S. Shyam Sunder, Sr. Counsel, Shri Anish Acharya, Ms. Dhanya P. Prasad, Ms. Ranjana P.B.
For the IRP: Shri Abhishek Sriram, Shri Adith Jahgirdar
For the Intervenor: Shri C.K.Nandakumar, Sr. Counsel
The Tribunal refused to intervene in CoC formation pending appeals, highlighting judicial propriety and adherence to higher court directives.
Headnote:(A) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 9 - Corporate Debtor - Petition for insolvency proceedings and the delay in forming Committee of Creditors (CoC) due to related pending appeals. (Paras 1-4)
(B) Appellate Jurisdiction - Authority refrains from intervening in the ambit of other judicial orders to ensure procedural integrity and avoid premature actions. (Paras 11-12)
Facts of the case:
The Corporate Debtor's suspended director filed appeals against NCLAT orders, impacting CoC formation due to related ongoing litigation which poses risks to project continuity.
Findings of Court:
The Tribunal found it appropriate to dismiss the application, citing the judicial propriety and the ongoing legal processes.
Issues: Main concerns included the timing of CoC formation amidst pending appeals.
Ratio Decidendi: The court underscored the importance of adhering to higher court directions and refraining from actions that could countermand those directive responsibilities.
Result: Application dismissed.
IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU BENCH
[Through Physical hearing/VC Mode (Hybrid)]
ITEM No.44
I.A.No.672/2025 in
C.P. (IB)No.98/BB/2024
IN THE MATTER OF:
M/s. Total Solutions Intec Pvt. Ltd. … Petitioner
Vs.
M/s. Buoyant Technology Constellation Pvt. Ltd. … Respondent
Petition under Section 9 of IBC, 2016
Order delivered on: 01.08.2025
CORAM:
SHRI SUNIL KUMAR AGGARWAL, HON’BLE MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
SHRI RADHAKRISHNA SREEPADA, HON’BLE MEMBER (TECHNICAL)
COUNSELS PRESENT:
For the Applicant : Shri M.S. Shyam Sunder, Sr. Counsel with Shri Anish
Acharya, Ms. Dhanya P. Prasad, Ms. Ranjana P.B.
For the IRP : Shri Abhishek Sriram with Shri Adith Jahgirdar
For the Intervenor : Shri C.K.Nandakumar, Sr. Counsel
ORDER
I.A.No.672/2025:
1. This Application has been filed in continuation of previous I.A.No.652/2024,
seeking an extension of stay on the formation of the CoC of the Corporate Debtor till the disposal of the reverse CIRP I.A.No.721/2024, which is
pending adjudication in the main Company Petition.
2. It is stated that subsequent to the last order dated 25.07.2025
W.P.No.21810/2025 against the Order of Hon’ble NCLAT was taken up by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka. However, due to the impugned Order not being available on the website of the Hon’ble NCLAT, the Writ Petition is
re-notified for 12.08.2025.
3. In the meanwhile, the Suspended Director of the Corporate Debtor has filed
a Civil Appeal vide Diary No.39847/2025 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court
of India, challenging the Order passed by the Hon’ble NCLAT with a request for urgent hearing.
4. It is stated that, in case the CoC is formed, the reverse CIRP Application will be rendered infructuous and even the Financial Creditors/Home buyers as well as the intervener will suffer. The reverse CIRP on the other hand, would ensure continuity of the construction project as a going concern, which the Resolution Professional himself would like it to be. The formation of CoC, on the other hand, will hinder the collaborative framework on being conferred with the decision making powers even though no Financial Creditor including the homebuyers have opposed the reverse CIRP proposal. Hence, the constitution of the CoC to be kept in abeyance to avoid procedural injustice and to ensure a project-centric resolution.
5. Memo of written submissions in support of the I.A. has been filed vide Diary No.4176 dated 31.07.2025, along with a memo of citations vide Diary No.4177 dated 31.07.2025.
6. We have heard the arguments advanced by the Ld. Sr. Counsel on behalf of the Applicant, and Ld. Counsel for the RP, as well as the Ld. Sr. Counsel appearing for the proposed intervenor in the reverse CIRP Application.
7. During the course of arguments, our attention is particularly drawn to the judgments in Ashok Gupta Vs. Manish Kumar Gupta & Anr. in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1243 of 2022, Ram Kishor Arora Suspended Director of M/s. Supertech Ltd. Vs. Union Bank of India & Anr. in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.406 of 2022, and Rajesh Goyal Vs. Babita Gupta and Ors., in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1056 of 2019, to stress that, in the case of flat/home buyers such kind of Orders of holding back the constitution of the CoC have been passed by the Hon’ble NCLAT itself.
8. Without much delving into the facts, the present status is that an order for commencement of CIRP in respect of Corporate Debtor was passed on
23.08.2024 which has not been altered by Hon’ble Appellate Forum while disposing off the appeal of the erstwhile promoter of CD.
9. The predicament of this Authority, now, is that the CIRP order dated
23.08.2024 was challenged by the Suspended Director of the Corporate Debtor before the Hon’ble NCLAT Chennai. The said Appeal has been dismissed, even if on technical ground, as is being claimed. Meanwhile, there was an order staying the formation of CoC passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in W.P.No.24478/2024 which continued till or about sometime in the last week of July, 2025.
10. The disp
