Case Details: Arrhum Tradelink (P.) Ltd. vs. Manoj Khattar - [2026] 184 taxmann.com 415 (NCLT-Ahd.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Mrs Chitra Hankare, Judicial Member & Dr Velamur G Venkata Chalapathy, Technical Member
-
Aadit Sanjanwala, Adv. for the Applicant.
-
Nipun Singhvi, Mayur Jugtawat, Rahul Bhavsar, Nikunt Raval, Ramchandra Madan, Ishan Agrawal, Tirth Nayak, Advs. & Amar N. Bhatt, Senior Adv. for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
In the instant case, the CIRP was initiated against the corporate debtor and, as no resolution plan was approved, liquidation was ordered. The Liquidator issued a public sale notice for the sale of the corporate debtor as a going concern and conducted an e-auction in which the applicant emerged as the successful bidder.
The applicant filed an application under Section 60(5) of the IBC, seeking relief and concessions, which was dismissed. On appeal, the NCLAT set aside said order, permitting the applicant to file a fresh application for reliefs and concessions.
The applicant filed the present application under Section 60(5)(c) of the IBC seeking broad reliefs, concessions, relaxations and permissions to enable revival and continued operations of the Corporate Debtor as a going concern, asserting acquisition with absolute title free from past liabilities and seeking clean-slate treatment and securities-law related directions, including on delisting/relisting and an effective date.
NCLT Held
The NCLT held that since corporate debtor had been sold on an ‘as is where is’, ‘as is what is’, ‘whatever there is’ and ‘without recourse’ basis and it seemed that no reliefs and concessions sought by applicant were contemplated in terms and conditions of process document, nor consent or opinion sought before proceeding on sale as going concern under Section 32A from this Tribunal, application filed under Section 60(5)(c) by applicant was not maintainable, even if application was filed also under Regulation 32A of IBBI (LP) Regulations read with Rule 11 of NCLT rules. Therefore, the instant application was to be rejected.
List of Cases Reviewed
- Shantech International (P.) Ltd. v. Devendra Singh CA (AT) (Ins) No. 1520 of 2024 (para 11) followed
List of Cases Referred to
- Embassy Property Developments (P.) Ltd. v. State of Karnataka [2019] 112 taxmann.com 56/[2020] 157 SCL 445 (SC) (para 5)
- Arun Kumar Jagatramka v. Jindal Steel and Power Ltd. [2021] 125 taxmann.com 244/165 SCL 652 (SC) (para 8)
- Shantech International (P.) Ltd. v. Devendra Singh [CA (AT) (Ins) No. 1520 of 2024] (para 11).
The post No Reliefs in Going Concern Sale on ‘As Is Where Is’ Basis | NCLT appeared first on Taxmann Blog.
