# M/S ART CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. vs. UDAYRAJ PATWARDHAN RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL ADEL LANDMARKS LTD & Ors.

> NCLAT judgment dated 16 Apr 2026. Citation: TCN-2026-NCLAT-00028. This appeal arises from an order dated 27.02.2026 by the Adjudicating Authority (National…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 16 Apr 2026
- **Citation:** TCN-2026-NCLAT-00028
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/ms-art-construction-pvt-ltd-vs-udayraj-patwardhan-resolution-professional-adel-l-kwvf9

## Summary

### Background

This appeal arises from an order dated 27.02.2026 by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi, Court No. III) in I.A. No. 1817 of 2023 in C.P. (IB) No. 1083 of 2018. The NCLT remanded the resolution plan submitted by M/s Art Construction Pvt. Ltd. (Appellant-SRA), which had been approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) with an 82.66% vote-share, back to the CoC for reconsideration. The Corporate Debtor, M/s Adel Landmarks Ltd., was admitted into CIRP on 05.12.2018. The Adjudicating Authority's remand was based on five specific grounds related to the treatment of certain assets and claims.

## Facts

The Corporate Debtor, M/s Adel Landmarks Ltd., was admitted into Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) on 05.12.2018.

The resolution plan submitted by the Appellant-Successful Resolution Applicant (SRA), M/s Art Construction Pvt. Ltd., was approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) with an 82.66% vote-share on 15.09.2022.

The Resolution Professional (RP) subsequently filed IA No. 1817 of 2023 before the Adjudicating Authority seeking approval of the resolution plan.

On 27.02.2026, the Adjudicating Authority dismissed IA No. 1817 of 2023 and remanded the resolution plan back to the CoC for reconsideration based on five grounds.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority transcended its limited jurisdiction under Sections 30(2) and 31 …

**Ratio:** The commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) is paramount and

…

**Reasoning:** The CoC had approved the resolution plan with an overwhelming majority (82.66% vote

…

**Interpretation:** Sections 30 and 31 of the IBC delineate a specific and limited scope for the

…

**Application:** The NCLAT applied this principle to find that the AA had overstepped its

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Barun M…; Ashok Bh…
- **Appellants:** M/S ART CONSTRUCTI…
- **Respondents:** M/s Adel Landmarks…; Udayraj Pat…; +6 more
- **Other parties:** Insolvency and…; Corporate…; +9 more

## Timeline

- **2018-12-05 — CIRP Admi…**: The Corporate Debtor, M/s Adel Landmarks Ltd., was admitted into Corporate Insolvency…
- **2022-09-15 — Resolution Plan…**: The Appellant-Successful Resolution Applicant (SRA)'s resolution plan was approved by 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/ms-art-construction-pvt-ltd-vs-udayraj-patwardhan-resolution-professional-adel-l-kwvf9