NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Upholds Dismissal of Application for Interim Relief in Insolvency Matter — Prior Orders Must Be Respected.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: New Delhi
  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The matter involved an application by the Appellants, Mahesh B. Khairnar & Anr., seeking interim relief to maintain status quo on a property during the pendency of their appeal in the insolvency proceedings. The Appellants contended that they were obligated to pay a significant amount under the Resolution Plan and that a portion of the land, measuring 57,438 sq. mtr., should be protected from being handed over to the Successful Resolution Applicant (SRA). They argued that previous orders had acknowledged their claim to this land. The Respondents, including the Resolution Professional, countered that the impugned order was merely an implementation of the approved Resolution Plan and that the Appellants were obstructing the handover of possession. The Tribunal noted that the issue had previously been addressed in another appeal, where it was directed that possession, if handed over, would be subject to the outcome of that appeal. The Tribunal also referenced a Writ Petition filed in the Bombay High Court, which directed the police to assist in taking possession of the property. Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the Appellant's application for interim relief, stating that it would contradict earlier orders from both the Tribunal and the Supreme Court. The appeal was scheduled for a hearing on 27.10.2026.

Headnote

A) Insolvency Law - Interim Relief - Application for interim protection - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section Not mentioned - The Appellant sought to maintain status quo on property possession pending appeal, arguing that part of the land belonged to them. The Tribunal held that granting such relief would undermine previous orders from the Tribunal and the Supreme Court, thus dismissing the application (Paras 1-6).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the application for interim relief to maintain status quo on property possession should be granted.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Tribunal dismissed the application for interim relief, stating that granting it would contradict earlier orders from the Tribunal, the Supreme Court, and the Bombay High Court.

Law Points

  • Insolvency proceedings
  • interim relief
  • resolution plan
  • status quo
  • possession of property
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (09) 86

I.A. No.7009 of 2026 in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 2044 of 2025

2026-09-28

Justice Yogesh Khanna, Barun Mitra, Ajai Das Mehrotra

Mr. Mohit Mathur, Mr. Pawan Reley, Mr. Sumit Misra, Mr. Harsh Gautam, Mr. Akshay Lodhi, Mr. Tanish Rawat, Mr. Amey Shejwal, Mr. Prakhar Agrawal, Mr. Asav Rajan, Mr. Kashish Chadha, Mr. Aditya Shah, Mr. Devang Shrotriya, Mr. Raghav Bansal, Mr. Rohit Gupta, Mr. Atul Sharma, Mr. Vikram Choudhary, Mr. Anuj Tiwari, Ms. Rubina Khan, Mr. Shivendra Nath Mishra, Mr. Sameer Mishra

Mahesh B. Khairnar & Anr.

Dhaval Jitendrakumar Mistry & Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Application for interim relief in insolvency proceedings

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought to maintain status quo on property possession

Filing Reason

To protect their claim on a portion of the property during the appeal

Previous Decisions

Prior orders from the Tribunal and the Supreme Court regarding possession and the resolution plan

Issues

Whether the application for interim relief should be granted Whether previous orders should be respected in the current proceedings

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued for protection of their land claim and status quo Respondents contended that the application obstructed the implementation of the resolution plan

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal emphasized the importance of adhering to previous judicial orders in insolvency proceedings, particularly regarding the implementation of resolution plans.

Judgment Excerpts

The relief sought for in the application cannot be allowed as this would amount to undoing the earlier orders passed not only by this Tribunal but also by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay. We are not inclined to entertain this application and accordingly it is dismissed.

Procedural History

The application was filed in the context of ongoing insolvency proceedings, with previous appeals and orders impacting the current request for interim relief.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Section 9 Petition for Appointment of Court Receiver in Partnership Dispute — Petitioner Failed to Establish Strong Prima Facie Case for Interim Relief. Court held that disputes regarding partnership accounts and alleged...
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Cancellation of Provisional Selection Due to Clerical Error in Marks Entry. Court Holds That Correction of Clerical Error to Include a Higher-Merit Candidate Does Not Violate Principles of Natural...