# In the matter of Rajesh Lallubhai Chitalia vs. Brijendra Kumar Mishra & Anr.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2024-05-01. Citation: TCN-2024-NCLAT-00468. The case involves an appeal against an order dated 05.04.2024 passed by the Adjudicating…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 1 May 2024
- **Citation:** TCN-2024-NCLAT-00468
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/rajesh-lallubhai-chitalia-vs-brijendra-kumar-mishra-anr-b42afe50

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against an order dated 05.04.2024 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, Court-IV) in I.A. No. 545(MB) 2024 in CP (IB) No. 631(MB) 2021. The appellant, the Suspended Board of Director and Promoter, sought directions to convene a meeting of Respondent No. 1 to place the revised resolution plan submitted by the applicant before Respondent No. 2, and to restrain Respondent No. 2 from making any final decision regarding the CIRP of the Corporate Debtor without considering the revised resolution plan. Form-G was issued in the CIRP of the Corporate Debtor, and persons expressed interest and RFRP to file the resolution plan.

## Facts

Rajesh Lallubhai Chitalia, the Appellant, filed an appeal against an order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT, Mumbai Bench) on 05.04.2024. The Appellant, being the Suspended Board of Director and Promoter, sought directions to convene a meeting to consider a revised resolution plan. The CoC had requested applicants to improve and submit resolution plans by 20.11.2023. The Appellant submitted a revised plan by this date. Later, the Appellant sent another resolution plan via email on 06.01.2024, which was not considered. The Appellant then filed I.A. No. 545 of 2024, seeking directions, which was refused. The Appellant argued that the email of 06.01.2024 contained improved financials and should have been considered. The Adjudicating Authority's order stated that

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority erred in rejecting the Appellant's application to consider the …

**Ratio:** The court held that the last date for filing an improved plan was 20.11.2023, and the

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the CoC had granted permission to all resolution applicants to

…

**Interpretation:** The court interpreted the facts to mean that the appellant had been given a

…

**Application:** The ratio and reasoning were applied to the specific facts of the case, where

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Barun M…
- **Appellants:** Rajesh Lallubhai…
- **Respondents:** Brijendra Kumar…
- **Advocates:** Utsav Tr…; Manini…; +1 more

## Timeline

- **2023-11-20 — Deadline for Revised…**: The CoC set 20.11.2023 as the deadline for all resolution applicants, including the…
- **2023-11-20 — Appellant Files Revised…**: The Appellant filed his revised resolution plan by 20.11.2023, meeting the deadline set…

---

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/rajesh-lallubhai-chitalia-vs-brijendra-kumar-mishra-anr-b42afe50