# In the matter of Jayshree Agnihotri vs. Nirmal Kumar Jain and Ors.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2025-05-20. Citation: TCN-2025-NCLAT-00025. Three company appeals were filed under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code,…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 20 May 2025
- **Citation:** TCN-2025-NCLAT-00025
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/jayshree-agnihotri-vs-nirmal-kumar-jain-and-ors-9dc51e3f

## Summary

### Background

Three company appeals were filed under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Two appeals were filed by Jayshree Agnihotri challenging orders dated 16.10.2024 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Indore Bench) in CP(IB)/26(MP)2024 and I.A. No. 386 of 2024 in CP(IB)/26(MP)2024. The third appeal was filed by Ashok Kumar Jain, challenging the order dated 16.10.2024 passed by the Adjudicating Authority in CP(IB)/26(MP)2024. The Adjudicating Authority admitted a Section 7 application filed by Nirmal Kumar Jain and other allottees, initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) of Pushp Ratna Realty Pvt. Ltd. The other impugned order rejected I.A. No. 386 of 2024, where Jayshree Agnihotri offered to make

…

## Facts

A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was entered on 14.09.2009 between Rajeev Agnihotri, Jayshree Agnihotri (Agnihotri group), Ashok Jain (Jain group), and Corporate Debtor-M/s. Pushp Ratna Realty Pvt. Ltd. The Agnihotri group owned land at Khajrana, Indore, and wished to develop a township. The Jain group agreed to provide funds through banks using the land as security. The entire construction cost was to be borne by the Agnihotri group. The Jain group was to take necessary steps for construction, and the land was to be transferred to Pushp Ratna Realty Pvt. Ltd. The Company's equity was to be divided 50:50 between the Agnihotri and Jain groups. The Jain group was to be paid charges for their service. A project named "Lush by Pushp Ratna" was registered, with

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Section 7 application filed by …

**Ratio:** The limitation period for initiating CIRP under Section 7 of the IBC is three years from

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLAT considered the date of allotment letters, the date of default (expiry of 30

…

**Interpretation:** The NCLAT interpreted the balance confirmation letter as a valid acknowledgment

…

**Application:** The NCLAT applied the ratio to the facts of the case, finding that the balance

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Barun M…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Jayshree Ag…
- **Respondents:** Pushp Ratna…; Nirmal Kuma…

## Timeline

- **2009-09-14 — MoU Exec…**: A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was entered between Rajeev Agnihotri, Jayshree…
- **2011-09-26 — Alleged MoU Can…**: The Jain group claimed the MoU was cancelled on this date, which the Agnihotri group…

## 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/jayshree-agnihotri-vs-nirmal-kumar-jain-and-ors-9dc51e3f