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

Order Date: 30.06.2026

Case Overview

This appeal, Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1083 of 2026, was filed by Anuj Goyal (Appellant), a homebuyer, against Mohit Chawla (the Resolution Professional for Chandigarh Overseas Pvt. Ltd.) and other respondents. The core dispute pertains to the interpretation and implementation of a previous order dated 23.04.2026 passed by NCLAT's Bench No. 1 (the Chairperson's Bench) in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 624 of 2026.

The Appellant contended that the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) violated the clear directives of the NCLAT's 23.04.2026 order. That order had specifically directed the Adjudicating Authority to first dispose of two Interlocutory Applications (I.A. No. 1442 of 2025 and I.A. No. 1718 of 2025, noted as likely I.A. No. 1617 of 2025) before considering the application for approval of the Resolution Plan filed by the Resolution Professional. The Appellant argued that by reserving judgment on both the IAs and the plan approval application simultaneously, the Adjudicating Authority was acting against this directive. The Appellant, identifying as a genuine homebuyer, expressed apprehension that any order approving the Resolution Plan before the IAs were decided would render his appeal infructuous and be against his interests.

The Respondents (the Resolution Professional and the Committee of Creditors/CoC) presented a different narrative. They submitted that the suspended Board of Directors of the corporate debtor had previously filed what they termed "frivolous applications" before the Adjudicating Authority concerning the constitution of the CoC and the admission of claims. These applications were rejected, and a subsequent appeal (Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 2105 of 2025) was dismissed by the NCLAT with a cost of Rs. 5 lakhs. The Respondents' central argument was that the Appellant was misinterpreting the NCLAT's order dated 23.04.2026. They clarified that a clarificatory application regarding the interpretation of this very order had been filed by the CoC and, upon mentioning, Bench No. 1 had directed it to be listed for hearing the next day, on 01.07.2026.

Final Outcome

The NCLAT bench comprising Justice Mohammad Faiz Alam Khan and Naresh Salecha did not rule on the substantive merits of the appeal. Instead, they found that the ultimate decision rested on the interpretation of the order dated 23.04.2026, which was originally passed by Bench No. 1. Acknowledging that a clarificatory application on this matter was already slated for hearing before Bench No. 1 on 01.07.2026, the bench directed the Registry to list the present appeal (Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1083 of 2026) before Bench No. 1 on the same date, 01.07.2026, to be heard alongside the clarificatory application. Additionally, the Appellant was directed to inform the Adjudicating Authority that the matter concerning the passing of orders on the IAs and the plan approval application is now under active consideration by NCLAT's Bench No. 1.

Topics: NCLAT Order, Insolvency Proceeding