# In the matter of Ashish Chaturvedi vs. Sanjay Garg

> NCLAT judgment dated 2025-04-23. Citation: TCN-2025-NCLAT-00096. The Appellants, suspended directors of A to Z Barter Pvt Ltd, challenged the order dated…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 23 Apr 2025
- **Citation:** TCN-2025-NCLAT-00096
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/ashish-chaturvedi-vs-sanjay-garg-c19a5ffd

## Summary

### Background

The Appellants, suspended directors of A to Z Barter Pvt Ltd, challenged the order dated January 16, 2025, passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), New Delhi, directing them to deposit ₹37,64,953/- into the liquidation estate of the Corporate Debtor. This amount allegedly represents funds withdrawn during the moratorium period under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The Appellants contend that the withdrawal was due to the encashment of post-dated cheques issued to Kewal Kisan before the CIRP initiation. The Respondent Liquidator argued that the Appellants were not cooperating and had wrongfully utilized ₹32 lakhs during the CIRP moratorium. The NCLT had previously directed the Appellants to deposit ₹32 lakhs with interest, which they

…

## Facts

The case involves an appeal against an order by the NCLT directing the suspended directors of A to Z Barter Pvt Ltd to deposit ₹37,64,953/- into the liquidation estate. This amount includes interest on ₹32,00,000/- which was allegedly withdrawn during the moratorium period under Section 14 of the IBC. The Appellants, Ashish Chaturvedi and Sanjay Kapoor, contend that the withdrawal was due to the encashment of post-dated cheques issued to Kewal Kisan before the CIRP initiation. They argue that the funds were not used for personal purposes and that the Adjudicating Authority (AA) overlooked the fact that the money was repaid through post-dated cheques. The Respondent, Sanjay Garg, the Liquidator, argues that the Appellants have not been cooperating, have failed to

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Appellants, suspended directors of A to Z Barter Pvt Ltd, are liable to deposit …

**Ratio:** The principle that directors are responsible for funds withdrawn during the moratorium

…

**Reasoning:** The court found that the Appellants had withdrawn funds during the moratorium period,

…

**Interpretation:** Section 14 of the IBC imposes a moratorium on the assets of the corporate

…

**Application:** The court applied the principle to the facts of the case, finding that the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Barun M…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Sh. Ashish…
- **Respondents:** A to Z Barter…; Sh. Sanja…

## Timeline

- **2018-12-05 — CIRP Init…**: CIRP of the Corporate Debtor was initiated by…
- **2020-11-09 — AA Order…**: Adjudicating Authority ordered that both directors of the CD namely Ashish Chaturvedi and…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 14 — Moratorium](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-14)

---

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/ashish-chaturvedi-vs-sanjay-garg-c19a5ffd