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

2026 Supreme(Online)(NCLT) 1166

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
Praveen Gupta, Member (Judicial), Ashish Verma, Member (Technical)
M/S K8 DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
BHUVAN MADAN – Respondent
CP (IB) No.330/ALD/2018



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms. Munisha Gandhi, Ms. Salina Chalana, Sh. Harit Narang
For the Respondents: Dr. Farrukh Khan, Sh. Dinkar Tiwari, Ms. Khushboo Sai Khurana

Specific performance claims cannot proceed outside the insolvency framework once a claim related to the transaction is filed and admitted in CIRP.

Headnote:(A) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 60(5) - Applications filed by shareholder seeking execution of sub-lease deed for commercial plots after Corporate Debtor's admission into CIRP - Claim for specific performance outside insolvency framework cannot be entertained - Relief under IA dismissed due to admitted claim in CIRP. (Paras 31, 32, 33)

(B) Specific Performance - Nature of Relief - Jurisdiction of Tribunal under IBC cannot extend to adjudicate matters involving specific performance of contracts during insolvency proceedings. (Paras 31, 32, 34)

Facts of the case:
The Applicant, a shareholder, filed the application seeking execution of a sub-lease deed for two commercial plots, asserting the Corporate Debtor had received full payment for the same. However, the name of the applicant company was previously struck off, changed back during the litigation process.

Findings of Court:
The Tribunal ruled that since a claim regarding the same transaction was already filed and admitted in the CIRP, the application seeking specific performance could not be addressed under Section 60(5).

Issues: Whether the application for execution of sub-lease deeds could proceed despite the company's insolvency and the pending claim in the CIRP?

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that once a claim is filed in the CIRP concerning the same transaction, any contractual enforcement outside this framework is impermissible.

Result: IA No. 469 of 2024 dismissed; IA No. 35 of 2025 allowed.

Table of Content
1. filing of applications against interim resolution professional (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. summary of prayers made by the applicants (Para 4)
3. details of claim and company background (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
4. history of contractual arrangements between the parties (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
5. details of payments and communications related to the lease (Para 11 , 12 , 13)
6. corporate debtor's alleged failure to execute the deed (Para 14 , 15 , 16)
7. relevant past judgments cited by the applicant (Para 18 , 19)
8. respondent's objections against applicants' claims (Para 20 , 21)
9. legal issues raised by both parties (Para 22 , 23 , 24)
10. tribunal's findings regarding facts and claims (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29)
11. observations on simultaneous claims and specific performance (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33)
12. final ruling on application ia no. 469 of 2024 (Para 34)
13. conclusion regarding the decision and order (Para 35 , 36)

ORDER

1. The present applications i.e. IA No. 469 of 2024 and IA No. 35 of 2025 have been filed against the Interim Resolution Professional (hereinafter referred to as “IRP/RP”) of Jaiprakash Associates Limited (hereinafter referred to as the “Corporate Debtor/JAL”).

2. IA No. 469 of 2024 has been filed on 02.09.2024 under Section 60 (5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as “the Code/IBC”) by Mr. Harish Kumar, (hereinafter referred to as the “Applicant”) seeking directions against the IRP/RP of the Corporate Debtor for completion of requisite formalities and execution of the sub-lease deed in respect of Plots No. C-3F and C-3G measuring approximately 4.08 acres situated at Jaypee Greens Wishtown, Sector-129, Noida, Uttar Pradesh in favour of M/s K8 Developers Private Limited.

3. Subsequently, IA No. 35 of 2025 has been filed on 10.01.2025 in I.A. No.469 of 2024 seeking to place on record the order restoring the name of M/s K8 Developers Private Limited (hereinafter referred as “Applicant Company”) and for substitution of the said company in place of the original Applicant in IA No. 469 of 2024 which has not been objected by the Learned Counsel representing the Resolution Professional and therefore, IA No. 35 of 2025 is allowed.

4. The Applicants have made the following prayers in the aforesaid applications:

IA No.469/202

a. Allow the present Application;

b. Issue necessary directions to the Respondent-Interim Resolution Professional of M/s Jaiprakash Associates Limited to complete the requisite formalities and execute the sub-lease deed of Plots No. C 3-F and C 3-G, measuring approximately 4.08 acres, situated at Jaypee Greens Wishtown, Sector 129, Noida, Uttar Pradesh in favour of M/s K8 Developers Private Limited (presently struck off, revival petition thereof bearing Appeal No. 5/252/ND/2024 is pending before the Hon'ble NCLT, Delhi bench); OR in the alternative

c. Issue necessary directions to the Respondent-Interim Resolution Professional of M/s Jaiprakash Associates Limited to complete the requisite formalities and execute the sub-lease deed of Plots No. C 3-F and C 3-G, measuring approximately 4.08 acres, situated at Jaypee Greens Wishtown, Sector 129, Noida, Uttar Pradesh in favour of the shareholders of K8 Developers Private Limited, in the event the aforesaid Company is not revived, in proportion to their shareholding;

d. Pass such other and further orders as are deemed necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case.

IA No.35/2025

I. Allow the present Application and take on record the Order of the NCLT, Delhi bench restoring the status of the company as well as the Amended Memorandum of Parties (Annexure A-1 and A-2);

II. Allow substitution of name of Company i.e. K8 Developers Private Limited in place of the present applicant i.e. Harish Kumar;

5. IA No. 469 of 2024 was initially filed by Mr. Harish Kumar, who claims to be a majority shareholder holding 60% shareholding in M/s K8 Developers Private Limited. It has been averred that at the time of filing of the Application, the name

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