# Mehul Harish Gosar vs. Athena Constructions Ltd. & Ors.

> NCLAT judgment dated 6 Apr 2026. Citation: TCN-2026-NCLAT-00124. This application (I.A. No. 869 of 2026) was filed by the Financial Creditor (FC), who is a…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 6 Apr 2026
- **Citation:** TCN-2026-NCLAT-00124
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/mehul-harish-gosar-vs-athena-constructions-ltd-ors-phtiw

## Summary

### Background

This application (I.A. No. 869 of 2026) was filed by the Financial Creditor (FC), who is a Respondent in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 767 of 2025, seeking clarification on a previous order dated 13.10.2025. The main Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 767 of 2025 was filed by Mehul Harish Gosar, a partner of a Corporate Debtor (an LLP), challenging an order by the Adjudicating Authority that admitted the partnership firm into Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). During the appeal's pendency, a settlement was reached between the parties on 21.08.2025.

## Facts

I.A. No. 869 of 2026 was filed by the Financial Creditor/Respondent seeking clarification to an order dated 13.10.2025.

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 767 of 2025 was filed by Mehul Harish Gosar, a partner of an LLP (Corporate Debtor), challenging the Adjudicating Authority's order admitting the partnership firm to CIRP.

A settlement was entered into between the parties on 21.08.2025, during the pendency of the main appeal.

The Adjudicating Authority's order admitting the partnership firm to CIRP was passed on 08.05.2025 in C.P. (I.B) No.539/MB/2024.

The applicant (Financial Creditor) submitted that paragraph 2 of the prior order did not fully disclose the settlement document dated 21.08.2025.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the previous order's statement 'the appeal is allowed' in paragraph 7 was legally correct, …

**Ratio:** Withdrawal of a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) post-admission, based on a

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal noted that its previous order inadvertently stated 'the appeal is allowed'

…

**Interpretation:** The phrase 'the appeal is allowed' was interpreted as an incorrect legal

…

**Application:** The Tribunal corrected its previous order by clarifying that the appeal was not

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** N. Sesha…; Arun Ba…
- **Appellants:** Mehul Haris…
- **Respondents:** Athena Constructio…; Financial C…
- **Other parties:** Insolvency and…; Corporate…; +4 more

## Timeline

- **2025-02-14 — Appellant Informs Adjudicating Authority of…**: The appellant informed the Adjudicating…
- **2025-03-19 — Accommodation Sought…**: Accommodation was sought for filing the…

---

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/mehul-harish-gosar-vs-athena-constructions-ltd-ors-phtiw