National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Dismisses Appeal in Liquidation Proceedings — No Valid Cause of Action Established. The Tribunal found that the order merely directed reassessment of gratuity claims without prejudice to further developments under Section 36(4) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

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

Case Note & Summary

The appeal was filed by the appellant, representing the VR (HPF) Senior Citizens’ Welfare Association, challenging an order of the Adjudicating Authority regarding the gratuity claims of certain employees of the corporate debtor. The appellant had previously moved an application (IA/1578/2025) to keep these claims outside the liquidation estate under Section 36(4) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. On 23.06.2026, the Adjudicating Authority considered this application along with two others and directed the liquidator to reassess the claim based on a prior order that had set aside a related liability. The Tribunal noted that the order did not provide a cause of action for the appeal, as it merely instructed the liquidator to consider the claim after hearing the applicant. The respondent's counsel indicated that a final order in IA 1578/2025 was still pending. The Tribunal required the appellant to present any necessary submissions to the Adjudicating Authority but ultimately dismissed the appeal, concluding that the appellant had no grounds to feel aggrieved by the order.

Headnote

A) Insolvency Law - Liquidation Proceedings - Appeal Against Liquidator's Order - Section 36(4) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - The appeal was dismissed as the order directed the liquidator to reassess the gratuity claim without prejudice to further developments. The Tribunal found that the appellant could not be aggrieved by the order as it merely required the liquidator to consider the claim after hearing the applicant. Held that the appeal lacked a valid cause of action (Paras 1-2).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the appellant had a valid cause of action to appeal against the order of the Adjudicating Authority regarding the gratuity claim.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal was dismissed as the Tribunal found that the appellant could not be aggrieved by the order, which merely directed the liquidator to reassess the gratuity claim after hearing the applicant.

Law Points

  • Liquidation proceedings
  • Gratuity claims
  • Adjudicating Authority
  • Section 36(4) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code
  • 2016
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (08) 139

Comp App (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 372/2026

2026-08-03

Justice N. Seshasayee, Jatindranath Swain

Mr. T. V. Suresh Kumar, Mr. AG Sathyanarayana

G Subramania Koushik

Hindustan Photo Films Manufacturing Company Ltd

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against an order of the Adjudicating Authority regarding gratuity claims in liquidation proceedings.

Remedy Sought

The appellant sought to challenge the order of the Adjudicating Authority.

Filing Reason

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

Previous Decisions

The Adjudicating Authority had directed the liquidator to reassess the gratuity claim based on a prior order.

Issues

Whether the appellant had a valid cause of action to appeal against the order of the Adjudicating Authority.

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that the order was based on inaccurate submissions. The respondent's counsel stated that a final order in IA 1578/2025 was yet to be passed.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held that an order directing reassessment of claims does not provide a valid cause of action for an appeal.

Judgment Excerpts

This appeal is preferred challenging what this Tribunal may prima facie consider as an order that does not provide a cause of action for preferring of an appeal. The alleged liability arose solely pursuant to the RLC order, which has been set aside vide order dated 22.10.2025.

Procedural History

The appellant filed an application IA/1578/2025 before the Adjudicating Authority, which was considered along with two other applications on 23.06.2026. The Adjudicating Authority passed an order directing the liquidator to reassess the gratuity claim.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: Section 36(4)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Review Petition in Trade Union Representation Case — Previous Judgment Set Aside. The Court found that the minority union had no inherent right to represent individual grievances, a principle applicable to all unions under Comm...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Employees' Right to Bonus Under Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 — Clarifies Applicability Despite Authorised Controller Appointment.