Authority: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal at Chennai (Justice N. Seshasayee, Member (Judicial) and Jatindranath Swain, Member (Technical))
Order Date: 28 September 2026
Case Overview
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Chennai heard four consolidated company appeals (AT) (CH) (Ins) Nos. 441/2026, 382/2026, 385/2026, and 102/2026. The appellant in all matters is Gulam Mustafa Enterprises Pvt Ltd, with its erstwhile Managing Director Gulam Mustafa as the appellant in one appeal. The respondents include India Housing Fund & 2 Ors, Piramal Enterprises Limited, and various other parties. The proceedings involve insolvency matters concerning the corporate debtor, Gulam Mustafa Enterprises Pvt Ltd.
The key issue before the tribunal was the appellant's non-cooperation with the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). The tribunal noted that in its earlier order dated 10 September 2026 (paragraph 7), it had specifically directed the suspended director of the corporate debtor to lend cooperation to the IRP and share information as a pre-condition. However, the IRP reported that despite sending an email request for information on 13 August 2026, the appellant had not provided any of the requested information.
Additionally, the authorized representative of the home buyers reported that the appellant was directly contacting home buyers, which was creating difficulties in collecting information from them. The tribunal also noted that learned counsel for the banks (not yet arrayed as parties) submitted that the appellant had circulated a proposal to banks which was pending their consideration.
Final Outcome
The tribunal issued several directions:
1. Suo motu impleaded the authorized representative of home buyers as Respondent No. 4 in the proceedings
2. Directed the appellant to furnish all information requested by the IRP in the 13 August 2026 email
3. Allowed the appellant to withhold password sharing for the present
4. Required the appellant to share all information collected from home buyers with the IRP
5. Prohibited the appellant from contacting home buyers directly, requiring all communication to go through the IRP
6. Ordered the appellant, IRP, and authorized representative to file separate affidavits
7. Listed the matters for next hearing on 06 October 2026
8. Continued any interim orders until the next hearing date
The practical consequence is that the corporate debtor's management must now fully cooperate with the insolvency process through proper channels and provide all requested information to the IRP.
Topics: Insolvency Proceedings, Corporate Debtor Cooperation, Home Buyer Representation