NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Upholds Appellant's Bid in Insolvency Auction — Valid Auction Process Confirmed.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: NEW DELHI
  • 4
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved two appeals concerning the auction of assets belonging to a corporate debtor, M/s S. Kumars Nationwide Limited, which had gone into liquidation. The appellant, Krihaan Texchem Private Limited, emerged as the highest bidder in an E-auction held on 16.04.2021 for an additional land parcel. However, the Adjudicating Authority set aside the auction, directing a fresh auction based on claims of improper conduct by the liquidator and a lower reserve price. The respondent, UPL Limited, contended that the auction was invalid and sought to have the additional land sold to them at the same rate as their previous bid for Lot 2. The Tribunal analyzed the auction process, the reserve price determination, and the conduct of the liquidator. It found that the auction was conducted properly and that the reserve price was set correctly based on the total land area. The Tribunal emphasized that mere expectations of a higher price could not justify canceling a valid auction. Ultimately, the Tribunal upheld the auction results, confirming Krihaan Texchem's bid and rejecting the claims of UPL Limited. The decision reinforced the principle that auctions should not be set aside lightly and that the liquidator must adhere to established procedures.

Headnote

A) Insolvency and Bankruptcy - E-Auction Validity - Setting Aside of Auction - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 61 - The Adjudicating Authority set aside the E-auction conducted on 16.04.2021 based on erroneous calculations and assumptions regarding the reserve price. The Tribunal held that the auction was valid and should not have been interfered with as there were no allegations of fraud or collusion (Paras 22-36).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Adjudicating Authority erred in setting aside the E-auction conducted on 16.04.2021 and directing a fresh auction.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Tribunal set aside the impugned order of the Adjudicating Authority and directed the liquidator to issue a sale certificate for Plot No. 825/3 admeasuring 12,981.64 sq. mtr. in favor of Krihaan Texchem Private Limited, while dismissing the appeal of UPL Limited.

Law Points

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy
  • Auction Validity
  • Liquidation Process
  • E-Auction Procedures
  • Reserve Price Determination
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (06) 45

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 811 & 1106 of 2025

2025-05-02

Arun Baroka

Mr. Krishnendu Datta, Sr. Advocate, Ms. Priyanka Vora, Mr. Nand Kishor, Mr. Rohan Agrawal, Ms. Nishtha Jindal

Krihaan Texchem Private Limited

UPL Limited, Mr. Om Prakash Agarwal

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against the order of the Adjudicating Authority regarding the auction of assets in liquidation.

Remedy Sought

Krihaan Texchem sought to uphold its successful bid and have the auction results confirmed.

Filing Reason

The Adjudicating Authority set aside the auction results, prompting appeals from both Krihaan Texchem and UPL Limited.

Previous Decisions

The Adjudicating Authority directed a fresh auction and set aside the E-auction conducted on 16.04.2021.

Issues

Whether the Adjudicating Authority erred in setting aside the E-auction. Whether the reserve price for the additional land was correctly determined.

Submissions/Arguments

Krihaan Texchem argued that the auction was valid and should not have been set aside. UPL Limited contended that the auction was improperly conducted and sought to have the additional land sold to them.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held that a valid auction cannot be canceled based on mere expectations of higher prices and that the liquidator must follow proper procedures in conducting auctions.

Judgment Excerpts

The Adjudicating Authority set aside the E-auction conducted on 16.04.2021 based on erroneous calculations and assumptions regarding the reserve price. Mere expectation of the Liquidator that a still higher price may be obtained can be no good ground to cancel an otherwise valid auction. The auction was valid and not challenged by Respondent No. 1 – UPL.

Procedural History

The appeal was filed against the order of the Adjudicating Authority dated 02.05.2025, which set aside the E-auction results and directed a fresh auction.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: Section 61
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds State in Sales Tax Validation Act Case — Retrospective Validation of Tax Notification Upheld. U.P. Sales Tax (Validation) Act, 1958 validly cured defect in notification dated March 31, 1956 by retrospectively validating it und...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Assessment of Hindu Deities as Individuals under Income-tax Act. Hindu Idol is Juristic Entity and "Individual" in Section 3 Includes Artificial Juridical Persons.