# Mr. Hemant Yadav & Ors. vs. IDBI Trusteeship Services Limited & Anr.

> NCLAT judgment dated 27 Mar 2026. Citation: TCN-2026-NCLAT-00096. The appeals arose from two orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 27 Mar 2026
- **Citation:** TCN-2026-NCLAT-00096
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/mr-hemant-yadav-ors-vs-idbi-trusteeship-services-limited-anr-5d7481ee

## Summary

### Background

The appeals arose from two orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Chandigarh. The Corporate Debtor, Vatika Ltd., was developing a project 'Aspirations' and had allotted plots to the appellants (homebuyers). Despite payments, the appellants could not take possession or obtain conveyance deeds due to the non-issuance of No Objection Certificates (NOCs) by IDBI Trusteeship Services Ltd., the Financial Creditor. IDBI filed a Section 7 application to initiate CIRP against Vatika Ltd. The appellants, in turn, filed an application under Section 65 of the I&B Code, alleging that IDBI's Section 7 application was fraudulent and malicious due to the non-issuance of NOCs, which they claimed induced default and prejudiced homebuyers.

## Facts

Vatika Ltd., the Corporate Debtor, was developing a project named 'Aspirations' in Gurugram and obtained a registration certificate from Haryana RERA on 23.12.2022.

Appellants (Mr. Hemant Yadav, Mr. Rakesh Vasandani, Mr. Pratul Kumar Madan, Mr. Mukesh Yadav) were allotted plots (No. 39, 38, 31, 42 respectively) by Vatika Ltd. and executed allotment letters and agreements for sale on 17.10.2023.

Appellants made payments to the Corporate Debtor but were unable to take possession or get conveyance deeds due to the non-issuance of No Objection Certificates (NOCs).

IDBI Trusteeship Services Ltd. (Respondent No.1), a Financial Creditor, filed a Section 7 application (CP(IB) No. 45/Chd/Hry/2024) in June 2024 for initiation of CIRP against Vatika Ltd. due to default.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority erred in rejecting the application filed by the homebuyers under …

**Ratio:** For Section 65 of the I&B Code to be invoked, there must be specific pleadings

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLAT noted that the appellants' Section 65 application was filed 20 months after the

…

**Interpretation:** Section 65 requires a high threshold of proof for fraud or malicious intent.

…

**Application:** Given the lack of specific pleadings and cogent proof presented by the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bhushan…; Barun Mitra…
- **Appellants:** Hemant…; Rakesh Vas…; +2 more
- **Respondents:** Vatika Li…; IDBI Trusteeship…; +2 more
- **Other parties:** Insolvency and…; Section 65 of I&B…; +12 more

## Timeline

- **2017-06-30 — Debenture Tru…**: Debenture Trust Deed…
- **2022-12-23 — RERA Regist…**: The Corporate Debtor, Vatika Ltd., obtained a registration certificate for 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/mr-hemant-yadav-ors-vs-idbi-trusteeship-services-limited-anr-5d7481ee