NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Upholds Rejection of Stay Application in Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. The Tribunal ruled that the approval of the resolution plan by the Committee of Creditors was not subject to the appeal, thus denying the stay application.

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

Case Note & Summary

The case involved an appeal concerning the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) of Global Medicines Limited, where the appellant, Mayurkumar Vishnubhai Patel, a suspended director, challenged the order admitting a Section 9 application. The Tribunal had previously issued an interim order on 13.01.2026, stating that the CIRP would abide by the outcome of the appeal. During the proceedings, the appellant informed the Tribunal through I.A. No. 6474 of 2026 that the Committee of Creditors (CoC) had approved a resolution plan, which was pending approval from the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal clarified that the approval of the plan was not part of the appeal's subject matter and thus rejected the stay application regarding the approval process. The Tribunal noted that the appeal was scheduled to be listed for orders on 05.10.2026, with assurances from counsel to expedite the proceedings. The decision emphasized that the interim order did not cover the approval of the plan, leading to the rejection of the stay application.

Headnote

A) Corporate Law - Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process - Stay on Approval of Plan - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 9 - The Tribunal rejected the appellant's request for a stay on the approval process of the plan by the CoC, as the subject of approval was not part of the appeal. The interim order directing that the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) shall abide by the result of the appeal was still in effect, but did not extend to the approval of the plan. Held that the application for stay was not maintainable (Paras 2-2).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the appellant could be granted a stay regarding the approval of the plan by the Committee of Creditors (CoC).

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Tribunal rejected the application for stay regarding the approval of the resolution plan by the CoC, stating that the subject was not part of the appeal. The interim order was still in effect, but it did not extend to the approval process.

Law Points

  • Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process
  • Section 9 application
  • interim order
  • approval of plan
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (09) 241

I.A. No. 6474 of 2026 in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 167 of 2026

2026-09-24

Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, Indevar Pandey

Mr. Gaurav Mitra, Mr. Aayush Agarwal, Mr. Siddhant Jaiswal, Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Mr. Mayank Biyani, Ms. Honey Satpal, Mr. Akash Agarwalla, Mr. Harsh Pandey, Ms. Tanishka Kapoor, Mr. Abhinav Aggarwal, Mr. Aman, Ms. Tanya Gupta

Mayurkumar Vishnubhai Patel

Hiten Abhani

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against the order of admission of a Section 9 application in the context of corporate insolvency.

Remedy Sought

The appellant sought a stay on the approval of the resolution plan.

Filing Reason

The appeal was filed to challenge the admission of the Section 9 application.

Previous Decisions

An interim order was passed on 13.01.2026 directing that the CIRP shall abide by the result of the appeal.

Issues

Whether the approval of the plan by the CoC could be stayed pending the appeal.

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued for a stay on the approval process of the resolution plan. The respondents contended that the approval of the plan was not part of the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held that the approval of the resolution plan by the CoC was not subject to the appeal, and thus the stay application was not maintainable.

Judgment Excerpts

The subject of approval of plan is not the subject matter of consideration or even in the appeal, hence appellant cannot be granted stay with regards to the process of approval of plan as carried by the CoC or the consequential actions.

Procedural History

The Tribunal considered the appeal on 13.01.2026 and passed an interim order. The appellant filed I.A. No. 6474 of 2026 during the pendency of the appeal.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code: Section 9
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Quashes Proceedings in Domestic Violence Case Due to Lack of Jurisdiction and Non-Compliance with Procedural Requirements. The court held that the respondent did not have a domestic relationship with the petitioners and the ap...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Teachers' Appeal in Service Law Dispute — No Salary for Striking Teachers. Teachers Absorbed Back into Service Granted Seniority for Period Out of Employment.