NCLAT Dismisses Appeal in Insolvency Proceedings Due to Pending Financial Dispute. Approval of Resolution Plan Upheld as Financial Arrangements Do Not Fall Under IBC.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: NEW DELHI
  • 7
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appeal was filed by Nitin Mittal against an order dated 08.06.2026 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai, which approved a resolution plan submitted by Ritesh R. Mahajan, the Resolution Professional of Envirant Constructions Pvt. Ltd. The appellant contended that the funding for the plan was primarily based on a comfort letter dated 15.09.2024, which he had withdrawn prior to the approval of the plan. The respondent had filed a civil suit seeking specific performance of the comfort letter and additional financial deposits from the appellant. The appellant sought to have the plan rejected and the approval order set aside. However, the respondent pointed out that an intervention application filed by the appellant with a similar prayer was dismissed by the NCLT on the grounds that the financial dispute did not fall under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The court noted that the resolution plan included provisions for alternative funding should the appellant withdraw. Given that the resolution plan was approved and the financial dispute was still pending in civil court, the NCLAT found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it, while also disposing of pending applications related to the case.

Headnote

A) Insolvency Law - Approval of Resolution Plan - Dismissal of Appeal - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - The appeal was dismissed as the resolution plan was approved and the financial dispute was pending in civil court, leaving all rights open for adjudication there. Held that the financial arrangements do not fall within the purview of the IBC (Paras 1-2).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the approval of the resolution plan should be set aside due to the withdrawal of the comfort letter and pending financial disputes.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The NCLAT dismissed the appeal, finding no merit in the appellant's arguments regarding the resolution plan approval. The court noted that the financial dispute was pending in civil court and did not fall under the IBC.

Law Points

  • Insolvency proceedings
  • approval of resolution plan
  • financial arrangements
  • intervention application
  • specific performance
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (08) 67

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1463 of 2026

2026-08-12

Justice Yogesh Khanna, Barun Mitra, Ajai Das Mehrotra

Mr. Gaurav Mitra, Mr. Suyash Pande, Mr. Vishwajeet Pandey, Ms. Nikita Capoor, Ms. Lavanya Pathak, Mr. Ramchandra Madan, Mr. Tushar Nigam, Mr. Himanshu Yadav, Ms. Srividya Venkat, Mr. Prakhar Tandon

Nitin Mittal

Ritesh R. Mahajan Resolution Professional of Envirant Constructions Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against approval of a resolution plan in insolvency proceedings.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought to set aside the approval of the resolution plan.

Filing Reason

Dispute over financial arrangements and withdrawal of a comfort letter.

Previous Decisions

An intervention application by the appellant was dismissed by the NCLT.

Issues

Whether the resolution plan approval should be set aside due to the withdrawal of the comfort letter. Whether the financial dispute falls under the purview of the IBC.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the plan was based on a withdrawn comfort letter and sought its rejection. Respondent contended that the financial dispute does not fall under the IBC and the plan was validly approved.

Ratio Decidendi

The court upheld the approval of the resolution plan, emphasizing that financial disputes between parties do not fall within the purview of the IBC and should be resolved in civil court.

Judgment Excerpts

The plan submitted by the Respondent No. 3 was approved by the Learned Adjudicating Authority. The financial dispute between the parties is pending before the L d . Civil Court.

Procedural History

The appeal was filed against the NCLT order approving the resolution plan. An intervention application by the appellant was previously dismissed.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Petition Challenging Magistrate's Order Accepting 'C' Summary Report Without Considering Protest Petition on Merits. Magistrate Must Apply Judicial Mind and Pass Reasoned Order When Complainant Files Protest Petition Against ...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes MHADA Cancellation of Flat Allotment for Non-Payment Due to Non-Issuance of Demand Letter. Petitioner's Allotment Cannot Be Cancelled Without Issuance of Formal Demand Letter Under Regulation 18(1) of MHADA (Disposal of Land...