# In the matter of Sanjay Kewalramani Vs. Sunil Parmanand Kewalramani Ors. Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 57-2018

> NCLAT judgment dated 2018-07-12. Citation: TCN-2018-NCLAT-00211. The case involves an appeal against an order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 12 Jul 2018
- **Citation:** TCN-2018-NCLAT-00211
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/sanjay-kewalramani-vs-sunil-parmanand-kewalramani-ors-company-appeal-a4cf79ec

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against an order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Ahmedabad Bench, which admitted an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (I&B Code) for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Medilux Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. The application was filed by Mr. Sunil Parmanand Kewalramani (1st Respondent) and other respondents claiming to be financial creditors. The Adjudicating Authority admitted the application, declared a moratorium, and appointed an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). The appellant, Sanjay Kewalramani, challenged this order.

## Facts

Mr. Sunil Parmanand Kewalramani (1st Respondent) filed an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Medilux Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. ('Corporate Debtor'). The Adjudicating Authority admitted the application, declared a moratorium, and appointed an Interim Resolution Professional. Respondents 1st to 3rd claimed to be 'Financial Creditors'. The Adjudicating Authority held that the application at the instance of the 1st Respondent was not maintainable but that the application at the instance of the 2nd and 3rd Respondents was maintainable. The 1st Respondent's application was signed by Mr. Sunil Parmanand Kewalramani. The 2nd and 3rd Respondents were not party to the

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether in absence of authorization letter given by 2nd or 3rd Respondents, after rejection of the …

**Ratio:** A joint application under Section 7 of the I&B Code at the instance of the 2nd and

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that without an authorization letter, the application under Section 7

…

**Interpretation:** This issue concerns the procedural requirements for filing a joint application

…

**Application:** The court applied this principle to the specific facts of the case, noting that

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** S.J. Mukhop…; Bansi Lal…
- **Appellants:** Sanjay Kewa…
- **Respondents:** Medilux Laboratori…; Sunil Parmanand…

## Timeline

- **2018-02-02 — Order by Adjudicating…**: The Adjudicating Authority passed an order admitting the application, declaring a…
- **2018-07-12 — Order by Appellate…**: The appellate tribunal set aside the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority and…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 7 — Initiation of corporate insolvency resolution…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-7)

---

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/sanjay-kewalramani-vs-sunil-parmanand-kewalramani-ors-company-appeal-a4cf79ec