2026 Supreme(Online)(NCLT) 2955

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
Brajendra Mani Tripathi, Member (J), Man Mohan Gupta, Member (T)
Employees' Provident Fund Organization – Appellant
Versus
Teena Saraswat Pandey – Respondent
I.A. (I.B.C)/368(MP)2024 | (MP) CP(IB) 6 of 2020

A claim for provident fund dues, though statutorily excluded from the resolution estate, is not maintainable after a resolution plan has been finally approved and implemented, unless the claim was asserted in a timely and proper manner.

Headnote:(A) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Sections 60(5), 36(4)(a)(iii), 31, 18(1)(b), 238 - Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 - Section 11(2) - IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 - Regulations 12, 6 - Application under Section 60(5) r/w Rule 11 of NCLT Rules, 2016 - Claim for provident fund dues - PF dues are excluded from the resolution estate under Section 36(4)(a)(iii) and constitute a first charge under Section 11(2) of the EPF Act - However, the right must be asserted at the proper time and through proper mechanism; failure to do so defeats the claim - A Resolution Plan, once approved, attains finality and cannot be reopened to include a belated claim, even for statutory dues like PF, as it would undermine the certainty and integrity of the resolution process. (Paras 11, 12, 18, 19, 21)

(B) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 36(4)(a)(iii) - EPF dues vs. other statutory dues - EPF dues represent trust assets belonging to employees, not the corporate debtor, and are categorically excluded from the liquidation/resolution estate - This distinction has significant regulatory implications and should be reflected in IBBI regulations. (Paras 24, 25, 26, 27)

(C) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Role of Resolution Professional - The duty of a Resolution Professional under Section 18(1)(b) is an active, not passive, duty - The RP must proactively ascertain if the EPF Act applies to the corporate debtor and invite claims from the jurisdictional EPF authorities, rather than merely waiting for a formal claim to be filed. (Para 28)

Facts of the case:
The Employees' Provident Fund Organization (Applicant) filed an application seeking to intervene and have its claim of Rs. 5,27,236 for provident fund dues considered in priority. The Corporate Debtor was admitted into CIRP on 26.03.2021. A Resolution Plan was approved by the Committee of Creditors on 11.07.2022 and by the Tribunal on 25.08.2022. The plan was fully implemented, and the CIRP was closed on 08.06.2023. The Applicant had submitted its claim on 14.09.2021, which was after the initial deadline of 08.04.2021 and the extended deadline of 23.06.2021. The Resolution Professional had informed the Applicant of deficiencies in the claim format. The Applicant took no corrective steps and did not raise any objection until filing the present application on 19.07.2024.

Findings of Court:
The Tribunal dismissed the application. It held that while PF dues are legally excluded from the resolution estate, the Applicant's failure to file its claim in time and proper form, and its inaction after being notified of the deficiencies, meant it could not now burden the Successful Resolution Applicant. The Plan Approval Order had attained finality and was never challenged. Imposing an additional liability on the SRA would retroactively alter the economics of the transaction and undermine the resolution framework. The Tribunal also made recommendations to the IBBI to proactively protect workers' dues.

Issues: The main issues were whether EPF dues, which are excluded from the resolution estate, could be claimed after a final and implemented resolution plan, and whether the application was maintainable given the applicant's failure to follow proper procedures and timelines.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that while the legal principle excluding PF dues from the resolution estate is sound, its application depends on the claimant asserting it at the correct time and through the proper process. The finality of a judicially approved and implemented resolution plan cannot be disturbed by a belated claim, as it would undermine the certainty and integrity of the IBC framework.

Result: Application dismissed. No order as to costs. (Para 30) A copy of the order was forwarded to the IBBI for consideration of recommendations. (Para 31)

Table of Content
1. the factual and procedural background of the case, including the application by epfo for claiming provident fund dues during the cirp, the commencement of cirp against the corporate debtor, and the approval of a resolution plan. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. epfo's detailed contentions arguing that its statutory claim for pf dues is valid, filed within time, enjoys priority under section 36(4)(a)(iii) of ibc and section 11(2) of epf act, and cannot be extinguished by the resolution plan. (Para 6)
3. the resolution professional's arguments opposing the application, contending that epfo's claim was time-barred, not in the prescribed form, and that epfo acted as a silent spectator, thus failing to assert its rights in a timely manner. (Para 7)
4. the successful resolution applicant's arguments opposing the application, relying on the clean slate principle post-approval of the resolution plan, the time-barred nature of epfo's claim, and the paramountcy of commercial wisdom of the coc. (Para 8)
5. establishes the legal principle that pf dues are excluded from the resolution estate under section 36(4)(a)(iii) ibc, but acknowledges this principle does not automatically entitle the applicant to relief if the claim was not properly and timely asserted. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
6. the application is not maintainable due to epfo's failure to file a proper claim within the prescribed timeline and its inaction despite being informed, resulting in the finality of the approved resolution plan which cannot be disturbed. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22)
7. dismisses the application but makes recommendations to ibbi to impose a proactive duty on resolution professionals to verify epf applicability and notify authorities, to prevent future loss of workers' social security dues. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30)

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH COURT NO. 1 ITEM No.201 I.A. (I.B.C)/368(MP)2024 in (MP) CP(IB) 6 of 2020 Order under Section 60(5) r.w. Rule 11 IN THE MATTER OF:

Employees' Provident Fund Organization, through Regional Provident Fund Commissioner ........Applicant V/s Teena Saraswat Pandey, RP Rajpal Abhikaran Pvt Ltd & Anr. ........Respondent Coram:

Hon’ble Shri Brajendra Mani Tripathi, Member (J)

Hon’ble Shri Man Mohan Gupta Member (T)

PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER Delivered on 14/05/2026 The case is fixed for pronouncement of the order.

The order is pronounced in open Court vide separate sheet.

Sd/- Sd/-

MAN MOHAN GUPTA BRAJENDRA MANI TRIPATHI MEMBER (TECHNICAL) MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

Tomar IN THE HON'BLE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH I.A. (I.B.C)/368(MP)2024 IN C.P. (IB) NO. 6 OF 2020 [Application under section 60(5) of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 read with rule 11 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016]

In the matter of:

Employees' Provident Fund Organization, Indore Through Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Address: Regional Office: 7 Race Course Road, Indore (M.P.) ...Applicant Versus

1) Ms Teena Saraswat Pandey Resolution Professional — Rajpal Abhikaran Pvt. Ltd.

387F 114 Scheme Part 1, Behind Diksha Boys Hostel Sant Nagar, Indore, Madhya Pradesh-45201.

2) Agarwal Real City Private Limited Successful Resolution Applicant Agarwal House, 2nd Floor, 5-

...Respondents Yeshwant Colony Y.N. Road, Indore, Madhya Pradesh India 452001 Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Brajendra Mani Tripathi, Member (Judicial)

Hon'ble Mr. Man Mohan Gupta, Member (Technical)

Appearances:

Counsel for Applicant: Ms. Darshana Baghel, Advocate For the RP/respondent no. 1: Ms. Teena S. Pandey (RP in person)

Counsel for Respondent No.2: Mr. Praveen N. Surange, Adv.

ORDER DELIVERED ON: 14 .05.2026 INTRODUCTION AND FACTS OF CASE:

1. The present Interlocutory Application (I.A. (I.B.C)/368(MP)2024) has been filed by the Employees' Provident Fund Organization, Indore ("EPFO" / "Applicant") under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("IBC") read with Rule 11 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document