Allowed

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1589/ND/2026 of Catalyst Trusteeship Limited v. Mr. Harish Taneja (Resolution Professional of M/S Bcc Infrastructures Private Limited) & Ors.

NCLAT1 Sept 20261589/ND/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Appellant Financial Creditor challenged the delay by the Adjudicating Authority in deciding an application for approval of a Resolution Plan. The Tribunal observed the statutory 30-day mandate under Section 31(2)(A) and directed the Authority to dispose of the pending application on the next date or within 30 days of this order production.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to the Adjudicating Authority to dispose of the Resolution Plan approval application within 30 days or on the next listed date, whichever is earlier.

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1589/ND/2026 of Catalyst… — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | NCLAT (2026)

¶1

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶2

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1589 of 2026

¶3

IN THE MATTER OF: Catalyst Trusteeship Ltd. …Appellant

¶4

Versus

¶5

Harish Taneja Resolution Professional of BCC …Respondents Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

¶6

Present:

¶7

For Appellant : Mr. Gopal Jain, Sr. Adv. along with Mrs. Renuka Iyer, Mr. Anmol Bansal, Mr. Aman Agarwal, Mr. Atul Sharma & Mr. Aditya Vashisth.

¶8

For Respondents : Mr. Harish Taneja (in person) & Mr. Gaurav Raj Grover, for R-1.

¶9

O R D E R (Hybrid Mode)

¶10

[Per : Mohammad Faiz Alam Khan (Oral)]

¶11

01.09.2026 I.A. No. 6091 of 2026

¶12

Having heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant. We permit the Appellant to bring on record the certified copy of the Impugned Order within one week from today.

¶13

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1589 of 2026

¶14

1. The instant appeal has been filed by the Appellant who’s a Financial Creditor of the Corporate Debtor against the order dated 11.08.2026 passed by the Learned Adjudicating Authority in Company Petition No. (IB) 495 of 2023, whereby the I.A. No. 64 of 2024 filed by the RP for approval of the

¶15

Page 1 of 4

¶16

Resolution Plan under Section 31 of the Code has not been taken up for hearing and has been adjourned to 02.09.2026.

¶17

2. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Resolution Plan submitted by the Respondent No. 2 i.e., M/s Civitech Developers Private Limited was approved by the CoC on 08.10.2024 with 94.58% and in this regard, the aforesaid application was moved by the RP before the Learned Adjudicating Authority for approval of the Plan on 07.11.2024 and thereafter the same is pending before the Learned Adjudicating Authority and as of now the same has been adjourned 25-26 times and despite the indulgence of the Appellant and other parties the same has not been disposed of.

¶18

3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant has drawn our attention towards the Sub-section (2) (A) of Section 31 of the Code, in order to show that it is the incumbent duty of the Learned Adjudicating Authority to pass an order under Sub-section (1) or (2) of Section 31 within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the Resolution Plan therefore, it was obligatory on the part of the Learned Adjudicating Authority to have disposed of the application filed by the RP within 30 days, however, so far now it has been over two years and Plan approval application is pending before the Learned Adjudicating Authority, therefore, appropriate directions be given to Learned Adjudicating Authority to dispose of the aforesaid application in a time bound manner.

¶19

4. Learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 1/ RP submits that he has also interested to get the aforesaid application disposed of at the earliest because the same was moved by him.

¶20

Page 2 of 4

¶21

5. We have heard Learned Counsel for the Parties and perused the record and having regard to the order, we intend to pass the issuance of notice to the Respondent No. 2, who is the SRA, is hereby dispensed with.

¶22

6. We notice that the Resolution Plan submitted by Respondent No. 2 was approved by the CoC on 08.10.2024, and the application for the approval of the same was moved before the Learned Adjudicating Authority by the RP being IA No. 64 of 2024 for the approval of the same.

¶23

7. We also notice that it has been about two years, the Plan approval application moved by the Resolution Professional is pending before the Learned Adjudicating Authority and the Impugned Order of date 11.08.2026 show that the matter could not be taken due to paucity of time and the same has been adjourned to 02.09.2026.

¶24

8. This Appellate Tribunal is aware of the workload on the Tribunals, however, having regard to the mandate given under Section 31 (2) (A) has amended up to date, a duty has been cast on the Learned Adjudicating Authority to dispose of the application w.r.t., the approval of the Resolution Plan within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the Resolution Plan.

¶25

9. Thus, having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case and the provisions contained under Section 31 (2) (A), we dispose of the instant appeal, with the request to Learned Adjudicating Authority to dispose of the aforesaid plan approval application filed by the Resolution Professional, if possible on the next date on which it has been listed or within 30 days from production of the certified copy of this order before the Learned Adjudicating Authority, whichever is earlier.

¶26

Page 3 of 4

¶27

10. The appeal is dispose of in above manner.

¶28

[Justice Mohammad Faiz Alam Khan] Member (Judicial)

¶29

[Mr. Naresh Salecha] Member (Technical)

¶30

Sim/mr

¶31

Page 4 of 4

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1589/ND/2026 of Catalyst Trusteeship Limited v. Mr. Harish Taneja (Resolution Professional of M/S Bcc Infrastructures Private Limited) & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1589/ND/2026 of Catalyst Trusteeship Limited v. Mr. Harish Taneja (Resolution Professional of M/S Bcc Infrastructures Private Limited) & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1684/ND/2023 of assam company india limited vs Gujarat Hydrocarbons and Power Sez Ltd. & Ors.

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 626/ND/2025 of Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation vs Zaveri & Co. Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 628/ND/2025 of Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation vs Zaveri & Co. Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 627/ND/2025 of Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation vs Zaveri & Co. Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 190/CN/2026 of B. Parvathaiah vs Chillale Rajesh

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1251/ND/2025 of Mr. Yogesh Jogindernath Mehra vs National Asset Reconstruction Company Limited

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1297/ND/2025 of Ajay Jogindernath Mehra vs National Asset Reconstruction Company Limited

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1324/ND/2026 of Kesha v Kumar Nachani vs Encore Asset Reconstruction Company Private Limited & Anr.

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1585/ND/2026 of Aristo Texcon Private Limited vs Santanu Brahma

Ia 4211/ND/2026 of M/s. Vaibhav Mercantile Ltd. vs S Kaliyammal

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1572/ND/2026 of Sanford Vitrified Private Limited vs Vidres India Ceramics Private Limited

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1286/ND/2026 of Siddharth Satish Katariya vs Central Bank of India Limited & Anr.

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1458/ND/2026 of Rajiv Ranjan Sharma & Anr. vs Vikas Gopichand Khiyani

Ia 5639/ND/2026 of Kiran Hariraj Vishwakarma & Anr. vs Vikas Gopichand Khiyani