# In the matter of Aditya Kumar Tibrewal Vs. Om Prakash Pandey & Ors. Company Appeal (AT) Insolvency No. 583 of 2021

> NCLAT judgment dated 2022-04-06. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLAT-00550. The case involves an appeal against an order dated 26.02.2021 passed by the National Company…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 6 Apr 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLAT-00550
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/aditya-kumar-tibrewal-vs-om-prakash-pandey-ors-company-appeal-535e98df

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against an order dated 26.02.2021 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Kolkata Bench, which rejected I.A. No. 742/KB/2020 in CP (IB) No. 518/KB/2018 filed by the Resolution Professional (RP). The RP challenged a lease deed executed by the Corporate Debtor in favor of Respondent No. 3, alleging it was a fraudulent transaction intended to defraud creditors. The NCLT rejected the application based on non-compliance with Regulation 35A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 (CIRP Regulations, 2016) and Section 46 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016.

## Facts

The Bank of India initiated Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against M/s. Sri Balaji Forest Products Private Limited under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016. The CIRP was initiated vide order dated 18.10.2019. The Resolution Professional (RP) was appointed and constituted the Committee of Creditors (CoC). The Ex-Director of the Corporate Debtor did not cooperate with the RP and did not provide relevant documents. The RP filed an application under Section 19(2) of the Code, and the Adjudicating Authority directed the suspended directors to cooperate. The RP initiated 'Contempt Proceedings' against the suspended directors. The suspended directors shared a Lease Deed dated 30th November, 2016, executed by the Corporate Debtor in

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether an Application by the Resolution Professional relating to a Transaction covered under …

**Ratio:** The timeline prescribed in Regulation 35A of the CIRP Regulations is directory, not

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLAT relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'Surendra Trading

…

**Interpretation:** Regulation 35A imposes a duty on the Resolution Professional to take measures

…

**Application:** In the present case, the NCLAT noted that there was no cooperation by the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Alok Sriv…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Aditya Kumar…
- **Respondents:** Balaji Forest…; Om Prakash…

## Timeline

- **2018-01-01 — CP(IB) No. 518/KB/2018…**: Bank of India filed CP(IB) No. 518/KB/2018 under Section 7 of the Insolvency and…
- **2019-10-18 — CIRP Init…**: The Adjudicating Authority admitted CP(IB) No. 518/KB/2018 and initiated the Corporate…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 7 — Initiation of corporate insolvency resolution…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-7)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/aditya-kumar-tibrewal-vs-om-prakash-pandey-ors-company-appeal-535e98df