Authority: National Company Law Tribunal, Bengaluru Bench

Order Date: 16.06.2026

Case Overview

The application (IA No.857/2025) was filed by Smt. Yogitha Vijaykumar, Proprietor of Shree Ratna Farm Products (Operational Creditor), against Mrs. Shirley Mathew, the Erstwhile Resolution Professional of Mylari Agro Products Ltd. (Corporate Debtor). The application was filed under Section 420(2)(c) of the Companies Act, 2013 read with Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules, 2016, nearly three years after the resolution plan was approved on 15.02.2023.

The applicant sought multiple reliefs including: direction for payment of entire outstanding dues with interest; judicial notice of alleged fraudulent, preferential, and undervalued transactions; conducting forensic audit and fraud investigation; initiation of proceedings under Sections 43, 45, 49, and 66 of IBC; and review/setting aside of the approved resolution plan. The applicant alleged serious financial irregularities, diversion of funds, suppression of transaction values, and misconduct by the resolution professional during the CIRP process.

The respondent (erstwhile RP) opposed the application, contending it was not maintainable in law and constituted an indirect attempt to review the final order dated 15.02.2023. The respondent emphasized that Section 31 of IBC accords finality to approved resolution plans and any challenge should have been pursued through statutory appellate mechanisms under Section 61.

The Tribunal examined the transaction audit report which identified preferential transactions of ₹1.64 crore, undervalued transactions of ₹1.72 crore, and fraudulent transactions of ₹25.07 crore. However, the Tribunal noted that all allegations were based on materials available during the CIRP process with no new evidence discovered post-implementation of the resolution plan.

Final Outcome

The Tribunal dismissed the application, upholding the finality of the resolution plan under Section 31 of IBC. The order reinforced the 'clean slate' principle established by the Supreme Court in Essar Steel and Ghanashyam Mishra cases, stating that successful resolution applicants must take over corporate debtors without undecided claims from the pre-resolution period. The Tribunal found no exceptional circumstances or subsequently discovered fraud warranting interference with the concluded CIRP process.

Topics: Insolvency Resolution Finality, Operational Creditor Claims, NCLT Jurisdiction