# In the matter of Rakesh Kumar Gupta vs. IDBI Trusteeship Services Ltd. & Ors.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2025-04-24. Citation: TCN-2025-NCLAT-00087. This appeal was filed against the order dated 07.04.2025 passed by the Adjudicating Authority…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 24 Apr 2025
- **Citation:** TCN-2025-NCLAT-00087
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/rakesh-kumar-gupta-vs-idbi-trusteeship-services-ltd-ors-6b6ab4b2

## Summary

### Background

This appeal was filed against the order dated 07.04.2025 passed by the Adjudicating Authority in IA No. 1582 of 2025. The appellant, an Erstwhile Resolution Professional, was replaced. The IBBI had passed an order on 30.07.2024 suspending the registration of the appellant. The appellant's counsel referred to paragraph 4.6 of the order, stating that the CoC could decide to continue the services of the Resolution Professional. The appellant argued that the CoC had not decided to discontinue the appellant's existing assignment, and the application was filed by someone who was not a member of the CoC without hearing the appellant.

## Facts

Rakesh Kumar Gupta, the appellant, was an Erstwhile Resolution Professional for Three C Universal Developers Pvt. Ltd. The Respondent, IDBI Trusteeship Services Ltd. & Ors., filed an application (IA No. 1582 of 2025) before the Adjudicating Authority, which led to an order replacing the appellant. The IBBI had suspended the registration of the appellant on 30.07.2024. The appellant argued that the CoC, which should decide on the continuation of the Resolution Professional's services, was not involved in the application for replacement. The CoC was not made a party to the application filed by the Respondent. The Adjudicating Authority passed the order for replacement without hearing the CoC. The IBBI order copies were sent to all CoCs where the appellant was

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority replacing the appellant can be sustained …

**Ratio:** The principle is that any decision affecting the rights and responsibilities of a party

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the CoC was not a party to the application for replacement and

…

**Interpretation:** This issue highlights the importance of adhering to principles of natural

…

**Application:** In this case, the principle applies because the CoC was not involved in the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Barun M…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Rakesh Kuma…
- **Respondents:** Three C Universal…; IDBI Trusteeship…

## Timeline

- **2024-07-30 — IBBI Ord…**: IBBI passed an order suspending the…
- **2025-04-07 — Adjudicating Authority…**: Adjudicating Authority passed an order in IA No. 1582 of 2025 replacing the Appellant…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 220 — Appointment of disciplinary committee](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-220)

---

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/rakesh-kumar-gupta-vs-idbi-trusteeship-services-ltd-ors-6b6ab4b2