National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Dismisses Appeal in Insolvency Proceedings Due to Waiver of Rights. Appellant's Failure to Challenge Earlier Order Precludes Subsequent Appeal Under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: New Delhi
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute involved Honest Shelters Pvt. Ltd. as the appellant against Ravi Prakash Ganti and others as respondents in multiple company appeals concerning insolvency proceedings. The appeals arose from different company petitions, with the appellant being determined as an H1 bidder in a bidding process. However, the expected letter of intent was not issued, leading to the appellant's grievances. The Tribunal noted that an order was passed on 19.06.2026, allowing the promoters to bring in a better buyer, which the appellant did not challenge at that time. The appellant later attempted to challenge the subsequent order dated 24.07.2026, which referenced the earlier order without providing a new cause of action. The Tribunal found that the appellant's failure to contest the earlier order constituted a waiver of rights, and thus, the appeal was dismissed as misconceived. The court emphasized that the order of 24.07.2026 did not create a new avenue for the appellant to revive his claims, leading to the final decision to dismiss the appeal.

Headnote

A) Company Law - Appellate Jurisdiction - Cause of Action - Dismissal of Appeal - Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - The appellant's appeal was dismissed as the order dated 24.07.2026 did not provide a new cause of action, and the appellant had waived his rights by not challenging the earlier order dated 19.06.2026. The Tribunal held that the appeal was misconceived and could not be entertained (Paras 4-6).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the appellant could challenge the order dated 24.07.2026 based on the prior order dated 19.06.2026.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, stating that the order dated 24.07.2026 did not provide a new cause of action and the appellant had waived his rights by not challenging the order dated 19.06.2026.

Law Points

  • Appellate jurisdiction
  • Cause of action
  • Waiver of rights
  • Interpretation of orders
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (09) 146

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 1595 of 2026

2026-09-01

Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, Arun Baroka, Indevar Pandey

Mr. Sumesh Dhawan, Ms. Vatsala Kak, Ms. Khyati Khemka, Mr. Sagar Thakkar, Ms. Krishna Saklani, Ms. Kavya Tekriwal, Mr. Ravi Prakash Ganti, Mr. Siddharth Joshi, Mr. Samar Singh, Mr. Naman Gowda

Honest Shelters Pvt. Ltd.

Ravi Prakash Ganti & Ors.

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

Nature of Litigation

Company appeals concerning insolvency proceedings.

Remedy Sought

The appellant sought to challenge the order dated 24.07.2026.

Filing Reason

The appellant claimed that the order did not provide a new cause of action.

Previous Decisions

An order was passed on 19.06.2026 allowing promoters to bring in a better buyer, which the appellant did not challenge.

Issues

Whether the appellant could challenge the order dated 24.07.2026 based on the prior order dated 19.06.2026.

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that the order dated 24.07.2026 was an extension of the earlier order. The respondents contended that the appellant waived his rights by not challenging the earlier order.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed as the appellant failed to establish a new cause of action and had waived his rights by not challenging the earlier order.

Judgment Excerpts

The appellant did not participate in those proceedings of 19.06.2026. The appeal is misconceived and is accordingly dismissed.

Procedural History

The appeals were filed following the orders passed in various company petitions, with the appellant seeking to challenge the order dated 24.07.2026 after not contesting the earlier order dated 19.06.2026.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: Section 61
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Enhances Compensation in Motor Accident Claim Case — Apportionment of Negligence Between Driver and Deceased Upheld. The court upheld the Tribunal's finding of contributory negligence at 50% each and recalculated compensation unde...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Claimant's Rights in Fire Insurance Dispute — Insurance Company Ordered to Compensate for Loss.