Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(NCLT) 2705

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL: NEW DELHI PRINCIPAL BENCH
Bachu Venkat Balaram Das, President
Ms Vaibhav Mercantile Limited – Appellant
Versus
Sindhu Steels – Respondent
Transfer Application (IBC)/19(PB)/2026

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M. P. Srivignesh, Sharavena Raghul ASR, Mithun Kumaar N.
For the Respondents:

Territorial jurisdiction of the NCLT under Section 60(1) of the IBC is exclusively and mandatorily determined by the location of the corporate debtor's registered office, irrespective of the place of business or where the cause of action arose.

Headnote:The applicant sought a transfer of a company petition under Rule 16(d) of the NCLT Rules, 2016, from the Mumbai Bench to the Chennai Bench. The applicant contended that although the registered office remained in Mumbai due to pending litigation, the entire business operations and the cause of action were situated in Tamil Nadu. The court examined Section 60(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and found that the registered office of the corporate debtor is located in Mumbai. The primary issue was whether territorial jurisdiction under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is determined by the place of business or the registered office. The court reasoned that the language of Section 60(1) is "unambiguous, and mandatory," specifically linking jurisdiction to the registered office as recorded with the Registrar of Companies, regardless of where the cause of action arises or where the business is conducted. Accordingly TA (IBC) - 19(PB)/2026 stands dismissed

Table of Content
1. application for transfer of insolvency proceedings based on territorial jurisdiction. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. argument that business operations and cause of action justify transfer of jurisdiction. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
3. mandatory nature of section 60(1) ibc linking jurisdiction to the registered office. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. judicial precedents confirming registered office as the sole determinant of nclt jurisdiction. (Para 13 , 14)
5. dismissal of transfer request as the registered office remains in the current jurisdiction. (Para 15 , 16 , 17)

ORDER

1. The present Applicant, has been filed by M/s Vaibhav Mercantile Limited, seeking the following prayers:

“a. Allow the present application and pass an order of transferring the captioned Company Petition C.P.(IB)/1416(MB)2025 from Ld. NCLT, Mumbai Bench to Ld. NCLT, Chennai Bench in the interest of justice.

b. Such further and/or other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper.”

Brief Background

2. The Applicant Company was incorporated under the Companies Act 1956 on 09.10.1987 in the year 1987 and was duly registered with the Registrar of Companies, Mumbai, Maharashtra.

3. The Applicant Company used to make purchases of ferrous scrap from the Respondent. The Respondent sent two letters dated 02.04.2025 and 07.04.2025 regarding outstanding payments. The applicant sent a reply dated 22.04.2025.The Respondent issued a demand notice dated 30.09.2025 under Rule 5 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016.

4. C.P.(IB)/1416(MB)2025 was filed by Sindhu Steels(Operational Creditor)/Respondent against the Applicant/Corporate Debtor under Section 9 of the Code on 24.12.2025 before the NCL T, Mumbai Bench.

Submissions of the Applicant

5. It is submitted that in the year 2017 the Company was taken over by the present management and the entire business was completely shifted to the state of Tamil Nadu. Further, the registration of the Company could not be transferred to the state of Tamil Nadu as there is a summons case SS/4000024/2017 pending against the Applicant Company before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Girgaon (1), Mumbai.

6. It is submitted that the Applicant Company is currently operating in Chennai and all the statutory registrations like the GST, Udyam, trade license, etc. are registered in the State of Tamil Nadu.

7. It is submitted that both the Applicant and the Respondent operate in the State of Tamil Nadu and all the subject transactions took place in the state of Tamil Nadu which is within the jurisdiction of NCLT Chennai Bench but the Respondent chose to invoke the jurisdiction of the NCLT, Mumbai Bench just to harass and extort money from the Applicant. NCLT, Mumbai Bench vide its order dated 07.01.2026 permitted the Respondent to amend the application and the next date of hearing has been fixed as 06.02.2026.

8. It is submitted that all the transactions between the parties, records, ledgers, debit notes, invoices relevant to the dispute are located in Tamil Nadu and thus transferring the petition to Ld. NCLT Chennai Bench will serve the interests of justice and avoid unnecessary hardship and expenses for the Applicant.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS:

9. Details of the Transfer as sought in the Application is as follows:

Particulars of the Matter sought to be transferred	Currently pending before	Seeking transfer to
C.P.(IB)/1416(MB)2025	NCLT Mumbai Bench	NCLT Chennai Bench

10. It is the case of the Applicant that the Applicant Company was taken over by the present management and business has shifted to the state of Tamil Nadu. However, the registration of the Company could not be transferred to the state of Tamil Nadu due to a summons case SS/4000024/2017 pending against the Applicant Company before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Girgaon (1), Mumbai. At present the registered office of the Applicant Company is s

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(NCLT) 2705

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL: NEW DELHI PRINCIPAL BENCHBachu Venkat Balaram Das, PresidentMs Vaibhav Mercantile Limited – AppellantVersusSindhu Steels – RespondentTransfer Application (IBC)/19(PB)/2026

Territorial jurisdiction of the NCLT under Section 60(1) of the IBC is exclusively and mandatorily determined by the location of the corporate debtor's registered office, irrespective of the place of business or where the cause of action arose.

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL: NEW DELHI PRINCIPAL BENCH
Bachu Venkat Balaram Das, President
Ms Vaibhav Mercantile Limited – Appellant
Versus
Sindhu Steels – Respondent
Transfer Application (IBC)/19(PB)/2026