NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH COURT II Item No. 119 IA 399/2026 In C.P.(IB)1132(MB)2017 CORAM SHRI SANJIV DUTT SHRI ASHISH KALIA HON’BLE MEMBER (TECHNICAL) HON’BLE MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

ORDER SHEET OF HEARING (HYBRID) DATED 24.02.2026 NAME OF THE PARTIES: Raj Oil Mills Limited Appearance:

For Applicant : Adv. Uzair Kazi a/w Adv. D. Hublikar For Respondent : Adv. H. Khambete a/w Adv. Akshata P R-1 Mr. Atul Thukral (Legal Advisor)

IBC Under Section 10, 60(5)

ORDER

IA 399/2026

1. This Application has been filed by the Applicant/M/s Raj Oil Mills Limited seeking following reliefs:

“a. This Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to direct the Respondents to remove its adverse remarks as against the Applicant from the CIBIL report and CIBIL portal as Delinquent Credit Facilities and Doubtful and to record the Applicant Account as Standard Account in the CIBIL report and CIBIL portal;

b. for interim and ad-interim reliefs as prayed for.

c. For such other and further orders, as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice and fair play.”

2. Ld. Counsel for the Applicant submits that this Application has been filed by the Corporate Debtor/M/s Raj Oil Mills Limited, which has taken over the assets under the CIRP Process on 03.05.2018, as ordered by this Tribunal on 19.04.2018 in MA 35 of 2018. As submitted by the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant, the Corporate Debtor has been shown as a going concern under the CIRP proceedings.

3. It is submitted that the Rubberwala Housing and Infrastructure Limited (RHIL) jointly with Mukhi Industries Limited (MIL) have taken over these assets as ongoing concerns. Now the present Application has been filed praying that their names be removed from the CIBIL records.

4. Heard Ld. Counsel for the Respondent No.1/Small Industries Development Bank of India (SIDBI) for some time.

5. Counsel for the Respondent No.1 submitted that he has already filed his reply before this Tribunal.

6. It is submitted that Section 18 of the CICRA, 2005 provides a mandatory statutory mechanism for resolution of disputes between a credit institution and a borrower by way of arbitration and that when a special statute provides for a specific and exclusive dispute resolution mechanism, recourse to any other forum is barred.

7. It is further submitted that Applicant, having an alternate and efficacious statutory remedy, has wrongly invoked the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Tribunal, which lacks competence to adjudicate the present dispute.

8. It is further submitted that it is denied that Respondent No.1 has at any point of time wrongly, illegally or arbitrarily marked or continued the Applicant’s account as “delinquent” or “default-3".

9. It is also submitted that Counsel at the Bar has done the proceeding under the bona fide impression as required under the law.

10. However, we have examined the Officer concerned from SIDBI Mr. Atul Thukral, who has submitted that they are still pursuing the claim against the Guarantors. However, he has clearly submitted that there is no claim at present against the SRA/purchaser of the assets.

11. In view of this, we hereby direct the Respondent No.1/SIDBI to take steps to remove the name of the Corporate Debtor (being sold under the CIRP)

from the CIBIL within a period of 30 days.

12. Accordingly, IA 399/2026 is allowed and disposed of.

Sd/- Sd/-

SANJIV DUTT ASHISH KALIA MEMBER (TECHNICAL) MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

//Baabar//