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) 4047

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
Sanjiv Jain, Member (Judicial), Venkataraman Subramaniam, Member (Technical)
Tatad Nayan Gautambhai – Appellant
Versus
Pradhin Ltd – Respondent
CP(IBC)/39(CHE)/2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Bhagavath Krishnan
For the Respondents: P. Srikanth Rao

Upon satisfaction that a financial debt exists and a default has occurred, the Adjudicating Authority must admit a Section 7 petition under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, as it lacks discretionary power to reject on grounds of equity or commercial hardship.

Headnote:(A) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 7 - Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) - Admission of petition - Requirement to demonstrate debt and default - Financial creditor provided loan to corporate debtor; default occurred upon failure to repay by stated date - Corporate debtor admitted debt and default - Information Utility (NeSL) record authenticated debt - Held, satisfaction of debt and default mandates admission of Section 7 petition - Commercial hardship not a valid defense.

Facts of the case:
A financial creditor filed a petition under Section 7 of the Code against the corporate debtor seeking initiation of CIRP for a default of Rs. 12,98,00,000/-. The corporate debtor, while acknowledging the debt and the default in repayment, contended that CIRP would hinder its ongoing operations and revival plans, attributing its default to liquidity issues and market conditions.

Findings of Court:
The tribunal found no dispute regarding the existence of debt and the occurrence of default as evidenced by the loan agreement and the certificate from the Information Utility. It held that once satisfied that default has occurred, the tribunal has no discretion to refuse admission of the application.

Issues: Whether the petition seeking initiation of CIRP satisfies the requirements of debt and default under Section 7 of the IBC, 2016, and whether commercial hardship constitutes a valid ground for rejecting such an application.

Ratio Decidendi: Once the Adjudicating Authority is satisfied that a debt exists and a default has occurred, it is mandatory to admit the application, as Section 7 of the Code does not permit the consideration of equity or commercial impossibility to avoid initiation of CIRP when the statutory requirements are met.

Result: Petition admitted; CIRP initiated.

Table of Content
1. overview of parties, financial debt, and default particulars. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
2. corporate debtor's admission of debt and reliance on viability concerns. (Para 8 , 9)
3. evidence assessment confirming existence of valid loan agreement and default. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)
4. tribunal's mandatory duty to admit petition upon proving debt and default. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21)
5. appointment of irp and invocation of moratorium provisions. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27)

(filed under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 under r/w Rule 4 of the

Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016)

In the matter of

M/s. Pradhin Limited

Tatad Nayan Gautambhai,

S/o. Tatad Gautambhai,

Residing at:

B-22, Bhumi Park,

Parshyanath Township, Near Canal,

Krishnanagar, Ahmedabad City,

Ahmedabad, Naroda, IE, Gujarat-382 330

… Petitioner/Financial Creditor

Versus

Pradhin Limited,

61, Sembudoss Street,

Chennai-600 001

…Respondent/Corporate Debtor

Present:

For Petitioner : Shri. Bhagavath Krishnan, Advocate

For Respondent : Shri. P. Srikanth Rao, Advocate

CORAM

SANJIV JAIN, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

VENKATARAMAN SUBRAMANIAM, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

CP(IBC)/39(CHE)/2026

In the matter of M/s. Pradhin Limited

1 of 14

Order Pronounced on 2nd July, 2026

O R D E R

(Heard through Hybrid Mode)

This petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code,

2016 r/w Rule 4 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to

Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016) has been filed by Tatad Nayan

Gautambhai (hereinafter referred to as “Petitioner/Financial Creditor

against Pradhin Limited (hereinafter referred to as “Respondent/Corporate

Debtor) seeking initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process

(“CIRP”).

2. Part-I of the petition sets out the details of the Petitioner i.e.

Tatad Nayan Gautambhai. He is residing at B-22, Bhumi Park, Parshyanath

Township, Near Canal, Krishnanagar, Ahmedabad City, Ahmedabad,

Naroda IE, Gujarat-382 330. Part-II of the petition sets out the particulars of

the Corporate Debtor i.e. Pradhin Limited. It was incorporated on 03.12.1982

with Authorised Share Capital of Rs.5,00,00,000/- and Paid-up Capital of

Rs.3,64,69,000/-. Its Registered Office is situated at No. 61, Sembudoss Street,

Chennai-600 001 within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. In Part-III of the

petition, the Petitioner/Financial Creditor has proposed the name of

CP(IBC)/39(CHE)/2026

In the matter of M/s. Pradhin Limited

2 of 14

Shri. Rajesh Jasti having Registration No. IBBI/IPA-001/IP-P-02317/2020-

2021/13469 as Interim Resolution Professional.

3. Part-IV of the petition provides the particulars of the financial debt i.e.

Rs. 12,98,00,000/- and the date of default is stated as 30.09.2025. This petition

has been filed on 12.02.2026.

4. Part-V of the petition provides the list of documents attached with the

petition to prove the existence of financial debt and amount in default.

5. The case of the Petitioner in brief is that it (Financial Creditor) entered

into a loan agreement dated 03.09.2024 with the Corporate Debtor whereby it

lent Rs.11,00,00,000/- at an interest of 18% per annum as an Unsecured Loan

for business requirements. It disbursed an amount of Rs.10,83,00,000/-

through bank transfers as per details below:

09.09.2024 Rs. 2,85,00,000.00

13.09.2024 Rs. 2,85,00,000.00

20.09.2024 Rs. 2,85,00,000.00

25.09.2024 Rs. 2,28,00,000.00

6. In terms of the loan agreement, the Petitioner/Financial Creditor also

paid Rs.17,00,000/- to the Consultant who facilitated the arrangement for

unsecured loan.

CP(IBC)/39(CHE)/2026

In the matter of M/s. Pradhin Limited

3 of 14

7. The due date for repayment of unsecured loan along with interest of

18% per annum was 30.09.2025 as per Clause 2, 7, 10 of the loan agreement.

The Corporate Debtor issued the post-dated cheques for Rs.12,98,00,000/-

towards payment of principal and interest during the period from 06.10.2025

to 06.11.2025. The Corporate Debtor vide letter dated 05.11.2025, requested

the Petitioner not to

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