The Appellant challenged an order directing the Resolution Professional to issue an addendum to Form G regarding a charge. The Tribunal held that the addendum redressed the grievance and the Adjudicating Authority did not violate regulations.
No order as to costs. Pending internal applications disposed of.
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
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1585 of 2026
IN THE MATTER OF:
Aristo Texcon Pvt. Ltd. …Appellant Versus Santanu Brahma Resolution Professional of APL Metals Ltd. …Respondents Present: For Appellant : Mr. Gopal Jain Sr. Adv. with Mr. Kumar Anurag Singh, Mr. Zain A. Khan, Mr. Mohd. Abran Khan & Ms. Kriti Sharma, Advocates
O R D E R (Hybrid Mode)
31.08.2026
Heard Shri Gopal Jain, Learned Senior Counsel appearing for
the Appellant, as well as Shri Gaurav Mitra, Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Respondent, and perused the records.
1 | P a g e
submitted that, even after the passing of the impugned order by the Learned Adjudicating Authority, an addendum has been issued/published on 22.08.2026, providing 31.08.2026 as the last date for submission of the Expression of Interest. Thus, only nine days has been provided for the prospective resolution Applicant to submit their explanation of interest.
2 | P a g e
3 | P a g e
Perusal of the application would reveal that the Appellant was aggrieved by not showing his charge over the said property in the Form – G which was issued by the RP under the directions of the CoC. In this regard we also notice that the Learned Adjudicating Authority after noticing that the charge with regard to the Appellant should have been shown in the Form – G directed the RP to issue an ‘addendum’ to the Form – G, showing clearly the charge of the Appellant over the said property.
4 | P a g e
[Justice Mohammad Faiz Alam Khan] Member (Judicial)
[Naresh Salecha] Member (Technical)
KS/MR
5 | P a g e
2 issues framed by the court
Whether issuance of an addendum to Form G in compliance with the Adjudicating Authority's order violated Sub-regulation 4A of Regulation 36A of CIRP Regulations 2016.
Whether the Learned Adjudicating Authority was empowered to direct the issuance of an addendum instead of a fresh Form G.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
_Karad Urban Cooperative Bank Limited v. Swwapnil Bhingardevay & Ors., (2020) 9 Supreme Court Cases 729,Referred¶7
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Aristo Texcon Pvt. Ltd.
Santanu Brahma
Mohammad Faiz Alam Khan
Naresh Salecha
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
