National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Dismisses Appeal Against CIRP Initiation Due to Lack of Merit. The Court Found Respondent No.1 Was Not an NBFC at the Time of CIRP Initiation Under Section 7 of the IBC.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: New Delhi
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appeal was filed by B & G Power Ltd against the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Mona Portfolio Ltd by Respondent No.3. The appellant argued that the Respondent No.1 was a Non-Banking Financial Company (NBFC) registered with the Reserve Bank of India, and therefore, the CIRP initiated under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) was not maintainable. The appellant claimed that the Respondent No.1 had misled the Adjudicating Authority by concealing its status as an NBFC. The court noted that the Respondent No.1 had previously admitted its status as an NBFC in other proceedings but acknowledged that its registration was cancelled by the RBI in February 2019. The court found that the appellant was not aggrieved by the initiation of CIRP against Respondent No.1 but rather by the CIRP initiated against itself. The court concluded that the appeal lacked merit and dismissed it, allowing the appellant to seek remedies in the appropriate forum for any wrong disclosures made by Respondent No.1. The court upheld the validity of the CIRP initiation against Respondent No.1 as it was not an NBFC at the time of initiation.

Headnote

A) Insolvency Law - Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process - Validity of CIRP Initiation - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 7 - The appellant contended that Respondent No.1, being an NBFC, was not subject to CIRP under Section 7 of the IBC. The court held that Respondent No.1 was not an NBFC at the time of CIRP initiation, thus the initiation was valid (Paras 9-11).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Respondent No.1 was valid given its status as a Non-Banking Financial Company (NBFC).

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal was dismissed as the court found no merit in the appellant's claims regarding the status of Respondent No.1 as an NBFC at the time of CIRP initiation. The court upheld the validity of the CIRP initiated against Respondent No.1.

Law Points

  • Insolvency proceedings
  • Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process
  • Non-Banking Financial Company
  • Fraudulent initiation
  • Section 7 of IBC
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (09) 222

COMPANY APPEAL (AT)(INS) NO.562/2026

2026-09-24

Justice Yogesh Khanna, Mr. Barun Mitra, Mr. Ajai Das Mehrotra

Mr. Raghav Kakkar, Mr. Joel, Ms. Honey Satpal, Mr. Akash Agarwalla, Mr. Aman, Ms. Tanya Gupta, Mr. Ujjval Gupta

B & G Power Ltd

Mona Portfolio Ltd

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process.

Remedy Sought

B & G Power Ltd sought to challenge the CIRP initiated against Mona Portfolio Ltd.

Filing Reason

The appellant claimed that the CIRP was improperly initiated against an entity that was an NBFC.

Previous Decisions

The Adjudicating Authority had accepted the CIRP initiation based on the petition filed by Respondent No.3.

Issues

Validity of CIRP initiation against an NBFC Locus standi of the appellant in the proceedings

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that Respondent No.1 was an NBFC and thus not subject to CIRP under Section 7 of the IBC. The respondents contended that Respondent No.1 was not an NBFC at the time of CIRP initiation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the initiation of CIRP under Section 7 of the IBC was valid as Respondent No.1 was not an NBFC at the time of initiation, and the appellant's claims regarding fraudulent initiation were unfounded.

Judgment Excerpts

The appeal has no merit and is accordingly dismissed. Respondent No.1 was never a NBFC on the date of initiation of CIRP under Section 7 of IBC by Respondent No.3.

Procedural History

The appeal was filed against the order dated 20th January, 2026, passed in IA No.144/ND/2025 in CP(IB)/585/2024 by the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: Section 7, Section 65
  • Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934: Section 45-IA
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Revision Against Copyright Infringement Prosecution — Registration of Copyright Not Mandatory for Criminal Action Under Copyright Act, 1957. Court holds that prior registration under Section 44 is not a prerequisite for ...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Order on Caste Certificate Invalidity. The Court ruled that the respondent was not entitled to protection of service based on an invalidated caste certificate.