The NCLAT closed two company appeals filed by personal guarantors challenging insolvency proceedings against them. The judge's acquittal was due to the resolution plan already being approved by the Committee of Creditors and pending before the Adjudicating Authority.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.1297 of 2025
IN THE MATTER OF:
Ajay Jogindernath Mehra ….Appellant
Vs.
National Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. & Anr. ….Respondents
With
Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.1251 of 2025
IN THE MATTER OF:
Yogesh Jogindernath Mehra
….Appellant
Vs.
National Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. & Anr. ….Respondents
Present:
For Appellant: Ms. Varsha Banerjee, Advocate For Respondent : Ms. Fatema Kachwala, Mr. Dheeraj Nair, Ms. Ridhima Sharma, Advocates for R-1
O R D E R (Hybrid Mode)
02.09.2026 - The appellants, who are the personal guarantors, have
challenged the proceedings of admission of a petition under Section 95 of IBC as against them. While this petition remained pending consideration without there being any interim Order granted in their favour. It is important that the resolution plan as it was submitted by the appellant had already been approved by COC and is presently pending consideration for approval before the Ld. Adjudicating Authority. Owing to the aforesaid development, the learned Counsel
for the appellant on record makes a statement at Bar based on the instructions
2
of the appellant. That because of the fact that the plan of the appellant has already been approved, and same is pending consideration before the Ld. Adjudicating Authority. The company appeals, as such, in the present set of circumstances, are not required to be ventured into on their merits. Hence owing to the aforesaid statements, these two company appeals would stand closed.
These two company appeals sand closed accordingly.
[Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma] Member (Judicial)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical)
[Indevar Pandey] Member (Technical)
rs/ravi
Ajay Jogindernath Mehra
Yogesh Jogindernath Mehra
Sharad Kumar Sharma
Arun Baroka
Indevar Pandey
As recorded by the court registry
An appeal before NCLAT against an NCLT order in an insolvency proceeding under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
