# In the matter of Satish Balan vs. Neeta Navin Nagda & Ors.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2023-07-04. Citation: TCN-2023-NCLAT-00418. The appeal arises from an order dated 23.03.2023 passed by the Adjudicating…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 4 Jul 2023
- **Citation:** TCN-2023-NCLAT-00418
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/satish-balan-vs-neeta-navin-nagda-ors-068c3de0

## Summary

### Background

The appeal arises from an order dated 23.03.2023 passed by the Adjudicating Authority/National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, Court -V in C.P. 745/IB/MB/2021. The Adjudicating Authority admitted an application filed by the Respondent under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the Corporate Debtor, Anusmera Realty and Infra Private Limited. The Appellant, aggrieved by this order, filed the present appeal.

## Facts

The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was initiated against Anusmera Realty and Infra Private Limited, the Corporate Debtor, after an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) was admitted by the Adjudicating Authority. The Appellant, Satish Balan, Director of Balan and Chheda Developers Pvt. Ltd., filed an appeal against this order. The Respondent No. 1, Mrs. Neeta Navin Nagda, had contributed funds to the Corporate Debtor and held approximately one-third of the equity shares. The Appellant argued that the funds provided by the Respondent No. 1 were equity investments and not financial debt. The Corporate Debtor had paid interest to the Respondent No. 1 and deducted TDS on these payments. The Respondent No. 1 had also written

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the money contributed by the Respondent No. 1 along with her nominees was in the nature of …

**Ratio:** A 'Financial Creditor' may file an application under Section 7 for initiating CIRP

…

**Reasoning:** The Appellate Tribunal observed that the Corporate Debtor had paid interest to the

…

**Interpretation:** The Code does not prescribe that there should be a written agreement between

…

**Application:** In this case, the Corporate Debtor made acknowledgments of the debt to

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Naresh Sa…
- **Appellants:** Satish…
- **Respondents:** Anusmera Realty…; Neeta Navin…
- **Advocates:** Anjali S…; Simmi Bh…

## Timeline

- **2023-03-23 — Order by Adjudicating…**: The Adjudicating Authority/National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, Court -V passed…
- **2023-07-04 — Judgment…**: Date of the judgment by the National…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 61 — Appeals and Appellate Authority](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-61)

---

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/satish-balan-vs-neeta-navin-nagda-ors-068c3de0