NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Upholds Appellant in Insolvency Proceedings — Revives Section 95 Application for Fresh Consideration. Citing the necessity for a fair hearing, the Tribunal allowed the admission of an additional document and remanded the matter for fresh consideration under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

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

Case Note & Summary

The case involved two appeals filed by Think Hard India Private Limited against an order admitting a Section 95 application by the Financial Creditor. The appeals were heard in hybrid mode on 02.07.2026. The appellant sought to introduce an additional document, a letter dated 25.08.2022, which invoked a guarantee dated 27.07.2020. The appellant's counsel argued that the document could not be submitted earlier as they believed that the notice under Rule 7(2) of the 2019 Rules sufficed for invoking the guarantee. The respondent's counsel did not object to the admission of the additional document and agreed to remand the matter for fresh consideration, allowing the respondent time to file an affidavit regarding the new document. The Tribunal found that admitting the document served the ends of justice and set aside the impugned order, reviving the Section 95 application for fresh consideration. The Tribunal clarified that it would not opine on the merits of the additional document, leaving the decision to the Adjudicating Authority. The interim order was set aside, and the application was revived with all consequences.

Headnote

A) Insolvency Law - Section 95 Application - Admission of Additional Document - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 95 - The Tribunal allowed the admission of an additional document and remanded the matter for fresh consideration by the Adjudicating Authority, emphasizing that it would not express any opinion on the document's merits. Held that the ends of justice necessitated the remand for a fair hearing (Paras 4-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the additional document can be admitted and the Section 95 application be remanded for fresh consideration.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowed the admission of the additional document, and revived the Section 95 application for fresh consideration by the Adjudicating Authority.

Law Points

  • Insolvency proceedings
  • Section 95 application
  • invocation of guarantee
  • additional documents
  • fresh consideration
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (07) 27

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1147 of 2026 and Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1148 of 2026

2026-07-02

Justice Ashok Bhushan, Mr. Barun Mitra

Mr. K. Datta, Sr. Adv., Himanshu Satija, Ripul Swati, Anshul Rao, S. Shrivastava, Yash Tandon, Mr. Harsh Jain, Chiranjeev Singh, Mr. Abhijeet Sinha, Mr. Abhinav Aggarwal, Piyush Bhardwaj, Shivam Sengupta

Think Hard India Private Limited

Narendra Rajani & Anr., Pooja Ashok Rajani & Anr.

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

Nature of Litigation

Insolvency proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

Remedy Sought

The appellant sought to admit an additional document and revive the Section 95 application.

Filing Reason

The appellant believed the notice under Rule 7(2) sufficed for invoking the guarantee.

Previous Decisions

The Adjudicating Authority had admitted the Section 95 application.

Issues

Admission of additional document Revival of Section 95 application for fresh consideration

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that the notice under Rule 7(2) was sufficient for invoking the guarantee. The respondent had no objection to the admission of the additional document.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal emphasized the importance of allowing additional documents to ensure a fair hearing and proper consideration of the case under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

Judgment Excerpts

The Tribunal allowed the admission of an additional document and remanded the matter for fresh consideration. We make it clear that we are not expressing any opinion with regard to the letter dated 25.08.2022.

Procedural History

The appeals were filed against the order admitting a Section 95 application by the Financial Creditor.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: Section 95
  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2019: Rule 7(2)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Section 14 SARFAESI Order — Alternative Remedy Under Section 17 Available. Court Holds That an Order Under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act Can Be Challenged Under Section 17, and Writ Petit...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Employment Dispute — Service Termination Quashed. The court found that the bank failed to prove proper service of notice, and the employee had sufficient leave credit, thus the termination was quashed under Clause ...