# In the matter of Ajeet Kumar Saxena & Ors. Vs. Shubhkamna Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. CA(AT)(Insovlency) No. 471-2019

> NCLAT judgment dated 2019-09-03. Citation: TCN-2019-NCLAT-00311. The Appellants, allottees of the Corporate Debtor M/s Shubhkamna Buildtech Pvt. Ltd.,…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 3 Sept 2019
- **Citation:** TCN-2019-NCLAT-00311
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/ajeet-kumar-saxena-ors-vs-shubhkamna-buildtech-pvt-ltd-ors-ca-4e23f23d

## Summary

### Background

The Appellants, allottees of the Corporate Debtor M/s Shubhkamna Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., challenged the order dated 26.11.2018 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Court No. 4, New Delhi, which admitted an application under Section 9 preferred by M/s Concord Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (Operational Creditor). The first appellant, Mr. Ajit Kumar Saxena, argued that continuing the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against M/s Shubhkamna Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. would likely lead to failure of resolution. The appellant feared that the Successful Resolution Applicant might increase the price of flats/shops and alter the approved plan specifications, affecting the allottees.

## Facts

The Appellants are allottees of M/s Shubhkamna Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., the Corporate Debtor. An application under Section 9 of the IBC, filed by M/s Concord Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (Operational Creditor), was admitted by the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT). The Appellants challenged this order, arguing that the CIRP's continuation would likely lead to resolution failure and that the Successful Resolution Applicant might increase prices or alter the approved plan. The Resolution Professional contended that the appeal was time-barred and that an Insolvency Professional had been appointed to address the allottees' grievances. The allottees hold a significant voting share (87.3%) in the Committee of Creditors. The impugned order is dated 26.11.2018.

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the appeal is …

**Ratio:** The court did not explicitly rule on the maintainability of the appeal based on the

…

**Reasoning:** The court acknowledged the argument regarding the limitation period but chose to address

…

**Interpretation:** The court's approach suggests a willingness to consider the merits of the case

…

**Application:** The court did not dismiss the appeal based on limitation but proceeded to grant

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** S.J. Mukhop…; Bansi Lal…
- **Appellants:** Ajeet Kumar…
- **Respondents:** Shubhkamna…
- **Advocates:** Prakhar…; Arun B…; +3 more

## Timeline

- **2018-11-26 — Impugned…**: Order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal) admitting the…
- **2019-09-03 — Appeal F…**: The Appellants, allottees of the Corporate Debtor, filed an appeal against the order…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 9 — Application for initiation of corporate insolvency…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-9)

---

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/ajeet-kumar-saxena-ors-vs-shubhkamna-buildtech-pvt-ltd-ors-ca-4e23f23d