NCLAT Dismisses Appeal Against Dismissal of Section 7 Application with Reduced Costs. The Tribunal upheld the dismissal of the application due to a pending civil suit regarding inheritance, finding it not maintainable 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 appeal was filed by Rajeev Bakshi against an order dated 16.02.2026, where the Adjudicating Authority dismissed his Section 7 application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and imposed costs of Rs. 5,00,000. The dispute arose in the context of a pending civil suit in the Hon’ble Delhi High Court concerning the inheritance of assets belonging to Late Mrs. Pramila Bakshi. The Adjudicating Authority determined that since the rights and entitlements of the applicant were under consideration in the civil suit, the Section 7 application was not maintainable. The Tribunal found no error in this decision and upheld the dismissal of the application, but reduced the costs to Rs. 50,000. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed subject to the revised costs.

Headnote

A) Company Law - Maintainability of Section 7 Application - Dismissal of Application - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 7 - The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the Section 7 application on grounds of maintainability due to a pending civil suit concerning the inheritance of assets. The Tribunal upheld the dismissal but reduced the imposed costs from Rs. 5,00,000 to Rs. 50,000, finding no error in the Adjudicating Authority's reasoning (Paras 1-2).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Section 7 application is maintainable given the pending civil suit regarding inheritance.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal against the dismissal of the Section 7 application, reducing the costs from Rs. 5,00,000 to Rs. 50,000.

Law Points

  • Maintainability of application
  • Pending civil suit
  • Inheritance of assets
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (05) 104

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 599 of 2026

2026-05-14

Justice Ashok Bhushan, Indevar Pandey

Mr. Rajeev Bakshi, Mr. Mohit Choudhary, Mr. Harsh Agarwal

Rajeev Bakshi

Eco RRB Infra Pvt. Ltd.

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against dismissal of Section 7 application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

Remedy Sought

Rajeev Bakshi sought to challenge the dismissal of his application.

Filing Reason

The application was dismissed due to a pending civil suit regarding inheritance.

Previous Decisions

The Adjudicating Authority had dismissed the application and imposed costs.

Issues

Maintainability of Section 7 application Impact of pending civil suit on insolvency proceedings

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued for the maintainability of the Section 7 application. The respondent contended that the pending civil suit rendered the application not maintainable.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal upheld the Adjudicating Authority's decision that a pending civil suit regarding inheritance affects the maintainability of a Section 7 application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

Judgment Excerpts

The Adjudicating Authority took the view that when the right and entitlement of applicant is already pending consideration before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, the Section 7 application at the instance of the Appellant is not maintainable. We do not find any error in the order of the Adjudicating Authority dismissing the Section 7 application.

Procedural History

The appeal was filed against the order of the Adjudicating Authority which dismissed the Section 7 application and imposed costs.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code: Section 7
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows State Appeal Against Ad Hoc Appointment of Stenographer — Emphasizes Merit in Selection. Citing the lack of right to continue in service for temporary employees after failing a test.
Related Judgement
High Court Karnataka High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Partition Suit — Concurrent Findings of Fact Not Disturbed Under Section 100 CPC. Court holds that no substantial question of law arises when courts below concurrently found that suit property was joi...