Authority: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi

Order Date: 10 August 2026

Case Overview

This appeal, Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1330 of 2026, was filed by Roshan Lal Agarwal and another, the suspended directors of Buxa Dooars Tea Company (India) Ltd. (Corporate Debtor), against an order dated 12 June 2026 passed by the Adjudicating Authority in C.P (IB) No.193/KB/2025. The impugned order had admitted an application filed by the State Bank of India (Financial Creditor) under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) against the Corporate Debtor.

The appellants challenged the admission on two primary grounds. First, they argued a significant discrepancy in the debt amount claimed in the petition. The amount shown in Form-1 Part-IV was Rs. 9,03,57,078/-, while the statements of account (Annexure 2-O) for the period from 01.10.2023 to 13.05.2025 showed a principal outstanding of Rs. 6,27,88,818/- and interest of Rs. 54,71,032/-, totaling Rs. 6,82,29,797/-. This represents a difference of approximately Rs. 2.21 crore in the principal claim. Second, they contested the date of default mentioned in Form-1, Part-IV as 14.03.2024, asserting that the record of the National E-Governance Services Ltd. (NeSL) showed the date of default as 16.12.2023.

The appellants, through their Senior Counsel Dr. U.K. Chaudhary, submitted that under Section 7(5) of the IBC, an opportunity should be given to correct an incomplete application. Crucially, they expressed a strong inclination to settle the matter amicably with the respondent bank and revealed that a One-Time Settlement (OTS) proposal had already been submitted.

The Resolution Professional (RP) for the corporate debtor was present and reported that the Committee of Creditors (CoC) had been constituted and the process for calling claims was underway, though Form G (the public announcement inviting claims) had not yet been published.

Final Outcome

The Appellate Tribunal did not rule on the merits of the appeal but issued procedural directions and an interim order. The counsel for the appellant was directed to serve the appeal paper book to the respondents within two days. The respondents were given two weeks to file their replies, followed by a further two weeks for the appellant to file a rejoinder. The appeal was listed for the next hearing on 21 September 2026.

Most significantly, the Tribunal ordered that "till the next date of hearing, the Resolution Professional shall not issue Form G." This interim stay halts the public insolvency process. The counsel for the State Bank of India was present and was instructed to take instructions from the bank regarding the possibility of a settlement based on the appellants' OTS proposal.

The final outcome is an interim stay on the CIRP process, providing a window for a potential settlement between the parties before the next hearing date.

Topics: Corporate Insolvency, Debt Dispute, NCLAT Proceeding