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

Order Date: 06 October 2026

Case Overview

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) heard arguments on merits in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 929 of 2025 filed by Civitech Developers Pvt. Ltd. against Ajeet Kumar Rai & Ors. The appeal concerns the approval process of a resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. During proceedings, the Tribunal considered I.A. No. 6870 of 2026 filed by homebuyers seeking interim directions to prevent the Adjudicating Authority from finally disposing of I.A. No. 64 of 2024 (the application for approval of Civitech's resolution plan) pending the outcome of the appeal.

The Tribunal discovered serious misconduct by the Resolution Professional (RP), who had concealed the pendency of Appeal No. 929/2025 when appearing before a coordinate bench in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1589 of 2026. The RP had obtained an order dated 01.09.2026 directing expedited disposal of the plan approval application without disclosing the existing appeal. Examination of appeal records confirmed no reference to the pending Appeal No. 929/2025, which the Tribunal deemed "apparent misconduct."

The RP subsequently revealed that an addendum plan had been approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) on 19.09.2026 and was being presented to the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal found the RP's conduct demonstrated active connivance with the Successful Resolution Applicant to render the pending appeal infructuous by expediting plan approval.

Final Outcome

The Tribunal reserved judgment in the main appeal and issued several directives:

1. The Adjudicating Authority is requested to defer proceedings for approval of the resolution plan (I.A. No. 64 of 2024)

2. The Resolution Professional is directed to immediately inform the Adjudicating Authority not to proceed with the plan approval application

3. The Registrar of NCLAT is directed to send an immediate email to the Adjudicating Authority to halt proceedings

4. The IBBI Board is directed to forthwith consider suspension of the RP's license and initiate disciplinary proceedings for misconduct and violation of his duties as an officer of the court

The Tribunal found the RP's actions constituted a deliberate attempt to undermine the judicial process and concluded he "does not deserve to continue in office."

Topics: Insolvency Proceedings, Judicial Misconduct, Regulatory Action