Disposed

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1771/ND/2026 of Suresh Chandra Agarwal v. Ramphalbharadwaj

NCLAT17 Sept 20261771/ND/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal disposed of an appeal filed by an appellant aggrieved by the dismissal of his application before the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal noted the inconsistency in the appellant's characterization as a Financial Creditor versus a Financial Creditor in Class in lower orders. The Court disposed of the appeal by granting liberty to the appellant to move a

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the Appellant to move a recall application before the Learned Adjudicating Authority within 15 days.

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1771/ND/2026 of Suresh Chandra… — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | NCLAT (2026)

¶1

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶2

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1771 of 2026

¶3

IN THE MATTER OF:

¶4

Suresh Chandra Agarwal

¶5

…Appellant(s)

¶6

Versus

¶7

Ramphal Bhardwaj Resolution Professional of ANS Apartments Pvt Ltd and Anr.

¶8

…Respondent(s)

¶9

Present: For Appellant(s)

¶10

For Respondent(s)

¶11

: Appearance not marked

¶12

: Mr. Mohti Nandwani, Mr. Om Gulati & Ms. Akansha Mehta, Advocates for R-1 Mr. Akhand Pratap Singh, Advocate for SRA

¶13

O R D E R (Hybrid Mode)

¶14

17.09.2026 We have heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant, as well as Shri Mohit Nandwani, Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No. 1, i.e., Ramphal Bhardwaj, Resolution Professional, and Shri Akhand Pratap Singh, Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No. 3.

¶15

The instant appeal has been preferred by the Appellant, who’s claiming himself to be a Financial Creditor in Class, being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 31.07.2026, whereby the I.A. moved by the Appellant being I.A. No. 2518 of 2025 in CP (IB) NO. 1481/PB/2019, has been dismissed by Learned Adjudicating Authority.

¶16

Having heard submissions of Learned Counsel for the Appellant for quite some time it is reflected that the Appellant appears to be aggrieved by the impugned order as according to Learned Counsel for the Appellant, despite being categorised as a Financial Creditor in Class (Homebuyer) by this Appellate Tribunal, and up to the Hon’ble Supreme Court in paragraph No. 18 of the impugned order he has been treated as Financial Creditor in a class which is in

¶17

P a g e 1 | 3

¶18

direct contrast to the order passed by this Appellate Tribunal of date 03.02.2022 in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 110 of 2022 and the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of dated 18.04.2022, in Civil Appeal No. 2910 of 2022.

¶19

Learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 1 is in agreement that, by the order dated 03.02.2022 passed in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 110 of 2022, the Appellant was categorised as s Financial Creditor in Class, and the said order was approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 2910 of 2022 vide order dated 18.04.2022.

¶20

It is further submitted that the Appellant had earlier filed an I.A. bearing I.A. No. 4240 of 2022 for rejection of the Resolution Plan, wherein with the consent of the Resolution Professional as well as the of the Successful Resolution Applicant, the Appellant was treated as a Financial Creditor.

¶21

Learned Counsel for the SRA, however, submits that some time may be granted to him to file the reply, as the disposal of the appeal may have repercussion on the Resolution Plan as well.

¶22

Be that as it may, the only grievance so far as the Appellant is concerned is that despite his characterisation as a ‘Financial Creditor in Class’ up to the Hon’ble Supreme Court, he has been again categorised as a Financial Creditor by passing the impugned order.

¶23

That being so, we dispose of the instant appeal, giving liberty to the Appellant to move an appropriate recall application before the Learned Adjudicating Authority, enclosing therewith all the relevant orders, including the order passed by this Appellate Tribunal in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 110 of 2022 and the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 2910 of 2022 dated 18.04.2022, within 15 days from today and if such recall application is filed by the Appellant within the time stipulated by us, herein before the Learned Adjudicating

¶24

P a g e 2 | 3

¶25

Authority would be under an obligation to dispose of the same by passing a reasoned order within 30 days thereafter.

¶26

In case the recall application which would be moved by the Appellant is

¶27

dismissed, the Appellant may again approach us.

¶28

[Justice Mohammad Faiz Alam Khan] Member (Judicial)

¶29

[Naresh Salecha] Member (Technical)

¶30

KS/KM

¶31

P a g e 3 | 3

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1771/ND/2026 of Suresh Chandra Agarwal v. Ramphalbharadwaj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1771/ND/2026 of Suresh Chandra Agarwal v. Ramphalbharadwaj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1536/ND/2026 of Meghana Rajeev Kore & Ors. vs Milind B. Kasodekar

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1107/ND/2023 of New Okhla Industrial Development Authority vs Anand Sonbhadra & Ors.

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 184/ND/2023 of Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority through Chief Executive Officer vs Mr. Anand Sonbhadra Resolution Professional for M/S Subhkamna Buildtech Private Limited & Ors.

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1590/ND/2026 of Sanjeev Mahajan vs Nimitaya Hotel & Resorts Ltd. & Ors.

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 259/CN/2025 of Mandava Prabhakara Rao vs Mr. Navneet Kumar Gupta

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 258/CN/2025 of Mr. Mandava Prabhakara Rao vs Mr. Navneet Kumar Gupta

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1874/ND/2025 of Anjaniputra Ispat Limited vs Iag Company Limited Through Official Liquidator & Anr.

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 704/ND/2026 of Neetima Kad Personal Guarantor of Archon Engicon Ltd. vs Prawincharan Prafulcharan Dwary Rp of Neetima Kad Pg of Archon Engicon Ltd. & Ors.

Ia 3832/ND/2023 of New Okhla Industrial Development Authority vs Anand Sonbhadra & Ors.

Ia 5890/ND/2026 of Meghana Rajeev Kore & Ors. vs Milind B. Kasodekar

Ia 4002/ND/2025 of New Okhla Industrial Development Authority vs Anand Sonbhadra & Ors.

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1755/ND/2026 of Jud Cements Limited vs Catalyst Trusteeship Limited

Company Appeal(at)(Ins) 1757/ND/2026 of Jsb Cement LLP vs Catalyst Trusteeship Limited

Contempt Case(at) 34/ND/2024 of Abhijit Guhathakurta (Liquidator) vs Agc Networks Limited