NCLAT Allows Appeal in Insolvency Matter, Reopens Filing Portal. The NCLAT found merit in the Appellant's claim that the NESL certificate was not mandatory and allowed the reopening of the filing portal under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: NEW DELHI
  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute arose from an appeal filed by Kuber Infrastructure Realities LLP against CNX Corporation Ltd. regarding the rejection of a Company Petition (CP) under Section 7 of the Code of Insolvency and Bankruptcy, 2016 by the NCLT Mumbai. The NCLT had dismissed the application on 11.04.2025, citing a failure to rectify defects related to the NESL certificate, which was deemed mandatory. The Appellant claimed that they had been in correspondence with the registry, arguing that the NESL certificate was not necessary and that they could demonstrate the existence of debt and default. Despite the Respondent's absence during the proceedings, the NCLAT heard the appeal ex parte. Upon reviewing the case, the NCLAT found merit in the Appellant's arguments, determining that the NCLT's insistence on the NESL certificate was unwarranted. Consequently, the NCLAT allowed the appeal, set aside the NCLT's order, and directed the reopening of the e-filing portal to enable the Appellant to refile the Company Petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Headnote

A) Insolvency Law - Delay Condonation - Justification for Delay - Code of Insolvency and Bankruptcy, 2016, Section 7 - The NCLT dismissed the application due to failure to comply with objections regarding the NESL certificate, treated as mandatory. The Appellant contended that the NESL certificate was not mandatory and sought to establish their claim of debt and default. The Tribunal found merit in the appeal and allowed it, setting aside the NCLT's order and reopening the filing portal for the Appellant (Paras 1-4).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the NCLT's rejection of the application under Rule 63 due to delay and non-compliance with objections was justified.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The NCLAT allowed the appeal, set aside the NCLT's order dated 11.04.2025, and directed the reopening of the e-filing portal for the Appellant to refile the Company Petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Law Points

  • Insolvency application
  • NCLT Rules
  • delay condonation
  • NESL certificate requirement
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (07) 87

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1184 of 2025 & I.A. No. 4626 of 2025

2026-07-22

Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, Arun Baroka, Indevar Pandey

Mr. Samant h Rekhi, Mr. Aakash Khattar, Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Mr. Preeti Kashyap, Mr. Ankit Sharma, Mr. Sumit Kumar, Mr. Pulkit Mehrotra

Kuber Infrastructure Realities LLP

CNX Corporation Ltd.

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against the rejection of a Company Petition under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

Remedy Sought

The Appellant sought to have the NCLT's order set aside and the filing portal reopened.

Filing Reason

The Appellant claimed that the NESL certificate was not mandatory and sought to establish their claim of debt and default.

Previous Decisions

The NCLT had previously rejected the application due to non-compliance with objections regarding the NESL certificate.

Issues

Justification for delay in filing the application Mandatory nature of the NESL certificate

Submissions/Arguments

The Appellant argued that the NESL certificate was not mandatory and that they were in correspondence with the registry. The NCLT insisted on the NESL certificate as a mandatory requirement for the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The NCLAT determined that the insistence on the NESL certificate was not justified and that the Appellant should be allowed to establish their claim of debt and default.

Judgment Excerpts

The present application under Rule 63, NCLT Rules 2016 is filed seeking condonation of 321 days' delay. We find that there is enough merit in the appeal and we therefore allow the appeal.

Procedural History

The Appellant filed a Company Petition under Section 7 of the Code before NCLT Mumbai, which was rejected on 11.04.2025. The Appellant then filed an application under Rule 63 seeking condonation of delay, which was also rejected. The appeal was subsequently filed before the NCLAT.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code: Section 7
  • NCLT Rules: Rule 63
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Death Sentence Despite Delay in Execution — No Absolute Rule Established for Commutation. Prolonged delay in execution of a death sentence is an important consideration, but various factors must be evaluated.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Election Disqualification Case — Clarifies Status of Teacher's Employment. The court found that the appellant did not hold an office of profit under the State of Assam, as there was no established employer-employee re...