National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Revives Application Under IBC Due to Improper Dismissal. Dismissal for want of prosecution was found unjustified as the Appellant was actively pursuing the case.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: NEW DELHI
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appeal was filed against the order dated 29.01.2026, where the Adjudicating Authority dismissed the Section 94 application for want of prosecution. The Appellant, Dr. Manish Nandlal Tardeja, had filed the application after a Resolution Professional was appointed on 21.01.2025, who submitted a report. The Adjudicating Authority had previously directed the Resolution Professional to serve copies of the petition to all creditors, allowing them two weeks to file objections. However, the matter was not taken up on the scheduled date of 28.11.2025 due to time constraints and was subsequently dismissed on 29.01.2026. The Respondents argued that the Appellant was delaying proceedings to enjoy the moratorium under Section 94 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Tribunal observed that the dismissal for want of prosecution was not warranted as the Appellant was actively pursuing the case. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the dismissal order and revived the Section 94 application for fresh consideration by the Adjudicating Authority, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.

Headnote

A) Company Law - Dismissal for Want of Prosecution - Justification for Dismissal - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 94 - The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the Section 94 application for want of prosecution, noting the Appellant's delay in proceedings. The Tribunal found that the dismissal was not justified as the Appellant was present and pursuing the proceedings, leading to the revival of the application for fresh consideration. Held that the matter should be reconsidered by the Adjudicating Authority (Paras 1-3).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the dismissal of the Section 94 application for want of prosecution was justified.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Tribunal set aside the order dated 29.01.2026 and revived the Section 94 application for fresh consideration by the Adjudicating Authority.

Law Points

  • Dismissal for want of prosecution
  • Section 94 application
  • Moratorium under IBC
  • Fresh consideration of application
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (05) 87

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 646 of 2026

2026-01-29

Justice Ashok Bhushan, Indevar Pandey

Mr. Krishan Kumar, Mr. Ravi Kumar, Mr. Nitin Pal, Mr. Deval Dighe

Dr. Manish Nandlal Tardeja

Neha Vishal Dhomse & Anr.

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against dismissal of Section 94 application

Remedy Sought

Revival of Section 94 application for fresh consideration

Filing Reason

Dismissal for want of prosecution by the Adjudicating Authority

Previous Decisions

Order dated 29.01.2026 dismissed the application for want of prosecution

Issues

Justification for dismissal of Section 94 application Delay in proceedings by the Appellant

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that dismissal was unjustified as they were pursuing the case Respondents claimed Appellant was delaying proceedings to enjoy moratorium

Ratio Decidendi

The dismissal for want of prosecution was not justified as the Appellant was present and actively pursuing the proceedings.

Judgment Excerpts

Under such facts and circumstances, we deem it appropriate to dismiss this Petition for want of prosecution. We make it clear that we are not expressing any opinion on contentions of either of the parties.

Procedural History

The appeal was filed against the dismissal order dated 29.01.2026, which followed an earlier order on 28.11.2025 where the matter could not be taken due to time constraints.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: Section 94
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court of India Examines Constitutional Validity of Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision Order for Bihar. Petitions Filed Under Article 32 of Constitution of India Allege Potential Disenfranchisement and Arbitrariness in Voter Ro...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Property Dispute Over Auction Sale — Upholds High Court's Finding That Auction Purchaser Was Real Owner, Not a Benami Front. The court held that the plaintiffs failed to prove that the auction purchaser was a benam...