NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Upholds Appellant's Claims in Insolvency Proceedings — Resolution Professional Ordered to Include Claims in Addendum.

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

Case Note & Summary

The appeal was filed by Himanshu Battish and another against the order of the Adjudicating Authority dated 18/12/2025, which dismissed their application for admitting a claim related to a homebuyer unit. The Appellants sought various reliefs, including condonation of delay in filing their claim and inclusion of their claim in the Resolution Plan. The Adjudicating Authority had previously rejected the claim due to its late submission. The Appellants argued that their case was similar to that of Smt. Reena, whose claims were allowed despite delays, as per a prior judgment of the Tribunal. The Resolution Professional acknowledged that a second addendum had been submitted, which included the Appellants' claims. The Tribunal, upon reviewing the previous judgment, found that the Adjudicating Authority's rejection of the claims could not be sustained. It directed that the Appellants' claims be treated equally to those of other homebuyers and ordered the preparation of an addendum to include their claims in the Resolution Plan. The appeal was ultimately allowed, and no further directions were deemed necessary as the Appellants would receive the same treatment as other homebuyers.

Headnote

A) Insolvency Law - Homebuyer Claims - Admission of Claims Despite Delay - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section Not Mentioned - The Tribunal held that the claims of the Appellants should be treated similarly to other homebuyers as per the previous judgment, allowing their claims to be included in the Resolution Plan. The Resolution Professional was directed to prepare an addendum to include these claims (Paras 7-8).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the claims of the Appellants should be admitted despite the delay in filing and how they should be treated in the Resolution Plan.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing that the Appellants' claims be included in the Resolution Plan and treated equally to other homebuyers, with no further directions required.

Law Points

  • Insolvency proceedings
  • homebuyer claims
  • delay in filing claims
  • treatment of creditors
  • addendum preparation
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (05) 85

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 280 of 2026

2026-05-19

Justice Ashok Bhushan, Barun Mitra

Dr. Harshvir Pratap Sharma, Mr. Tejas Patel, Mrs. Meera Kaura, Mr. Shlok Mishra, Ms. Manvi Jain

Himanshu Battish and Anr

Rabindra Kumar Mintri Resolution Professional (For Today Homes Noida Pvt. Ltd.)

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against the dismissal of a claim application in insolvency proceedings.

Remedy Sought

Appellants sought inclusion of their claim in the Resolution Plan and condonation of delay.

Filing Reason

Claim was not accepted due to late filing.

Previous Decisions

The Adjudicating Authority had previously rejected the claim based on its timing.

Issues

Whether the delay in filing the claim should bar its admission How the claims should be treated in the Resolution Plan

Submissions/Arguments

Appellants argued for equal treatment as per previous judgments Resolution Professional acknowledged inclusion in the second addendum

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal emphasized the need for equal treatment of homebuyer claims in insolvency proceedings, allowing claims despite delays based on previous judgments.

Judgment Excerpts

The order dated 22.01.2025 passed by the Adjudicating Authority in the IAs filed by the Appellants is set aside. The claim of the Appellants shall not be treated to be covered by clause of the Resolution Plan which provide for refund of 50% of the principal amount.

Procedural History

The appeal was filed against the dismissal of the claim application by the Adjudicating Authority, which had previously rejected the claim due to delay.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Restores Appeal Dismissed Due to Advocate's Absence — Upholds Litigant's Right to Fair Hearing. The court ruled that a litigant should not suffer due to the negligence of their advocate, restoring the appeal for a proper hearing.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Father's Custody of Minor Child in Habeas Corpus Petition, Emphasizing Natural Guardian's Right and Child's Welfare. The court held that the father, as natural guardian, is entitled to custody unless it is against the child's wel...