# In the matter of IDBI Bank Ltd. vs. KRS Erectors Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2025-04-28. Citation: TCN-2025-NCLAT-00079. The Company Appeal arises from an Impugned Order dated 28.05.2024 passed by the NCLT,…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 28 Apr 2025
- **Citation:** TCN-2025-NCLAT-00079
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/idbi-bank-ltd-vs-krs-erectors-pvt-ltd-ors-6e06d44d

## Summary

### Background

The Company Appeal arises from an Impugned Order dated 28.05.2024 passed by the NCLT, Hyderabad Bench. The order relates to the implementation of an Acquisition Plan and directs the formation of a Monitoring Committee to ensure adherence to timelines. The Appellant, IDBI Bank Limited, filed an Interlocutory Application (IA No. 252/2025) seeking to introduce Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited (MSPGCL) as a party and to restrain them from dealing with the assets of the Corporate Debtor. Another IA (IA No. 328/2025) was filed to amend the cause title of IA No. 252/2025.

## Facts

IDBI Bank Ltd., the Appellant, filed a Company Appeal challenging an order related to the implementation of an Acquisition Plan. The NCLT directed the formation of a Monitoring Committee to ensure adherence to timelines for the Acquisition Plan. KRS Erectors Pvt. Ltd. was directed to strictly adhere to the Acquisition Plan. IDBI Bank filed an Interlocutory Application (IA No. 252/2025) to restrain Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited (MSPGCL), a non-party, from dealing with the assets of the Corporate Debtor. The Appellant also filed IA No. 328/2025 to amend the cause title of IA No. 252/2025. The Registry raised an objection to IA No. 252/2025. The Appellant argued that Section 19 of the I&B Code allows for injunctions against non-parties. The

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether an Interlocutory Application can be preferred in a Statutory Appeal under Section 61 of the …

**Ratio:** The basic cannons of law require that any positive injunction or restraint as against a

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal reasoned that Orders of Injunction cannot be passed in a manner to take the

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of the law is that a party must be involved in the

…

**Application:** In this case, MSPGCL was not a party to the main proceedings, so an injunction

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Sharad Kumar…; Jatindranat…
- **Appellants:** IDBI Bank…
- **Respondents:** Lanco Infratech…; KRS Erectors Pvt.…

## Timeline

- **2024-05-28 — Impugned…**: Order passed by the NCLT, Hyderabad Bench in IA (IB) No. 41 / 2024 as preferred in CP…
- **2024-06-24 — Interim…**: The Company Appeal came up for consideration before the Tribunal at an admission stage…

## 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/idbi-bank-ltd-vs-krs-erectors-pvt-ltd-ors-6e06d44d