# In the matter of Hemant Shantilal Shah & Ors. vs. Care Office Equipment Ltd.& Ors.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2024-04-18. Citation: TCN-2024-NCLAT-00500. The appeal was filed under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016,…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 18 Apr 2024
- **Citation:** TCN-2024-NCLAT-00500
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/hemant-shantilal-shah-ors-vs-care-office-equipment-ltd-ors-842a50ca

## Summary

### Background

The appeal was filed under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, challenging an order dated December 20, 2022, passed by the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT, Ahmedabad Bench, Court-II). The impugned order allowed I.A. No. 358 of 2020, which approved the resolution plan submitted by Sudeep Dasani (Respondent No. 5) for the Corporate Debtor, M/s Care Office Equipment Ltd. The appellants, being personal guarantors, were aggrieved by this approval.

## Facts

The Corporate Debtor, M/s Care Office Equipment Ltd., was admitted into Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) on May 29, 2019, following an application filed by an operational creditor under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Subsequently, the Resolution Professional constituted the Committee of Creditors (CoC), published Form G, and invited Expressions of Interest (EOI) on August 14, 2019. The CoC was later reconstituted on November 21, 2019, with four members: SBI (26.37%), Bank of India (56.82%), Canara Bank (16.50%), and American Express (0.31%). During the CIRP, the 4th CoC meeting on October 23, 2019, approved a 90-day extension of the CIRP, which the Adjudicating Authority sanctioned on December 3, 2019. The 6th CoC meeting on

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Resolution Professional violated the CIRP Regulations in conducting the valuation …

**Ratio:** The RP did not violate the CIRP Regulations in the conduct of the valuation exercise, as

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLAT noted that **Regulation 27** and **Regulation 35** of the IBBI (Insolvency

…

**Interpretation:** The court interpreted **Regulations 27 and 35** to mean that the appointment of

…

**Application:** The CoC considered the valuation reports in detail and decided not to appoint a

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Barun M…; +2 more
- **Appellants:** Hemant Shantilal…; Heena Heman…
- **Respondents:** Care Office…; Vikash Gautamchand…; +7 more
- **Advocates:** Purti G…; Henna G…; +15 more

## Timeline

- **May 29, 2019 — CIRP Admi…**: Corporate Debtor, M/s Care Office Equipment Ltd., was admitted into Corporate Insolvency…
- **August 14, 2019 — EOI Invit…**: Form G was published, and…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 61 — Appeals and Appellate Authority](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-61)

---

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/hemant-shantilal-shah-ors-vs-care-office-equipment-ltd-ors-842a50ca