# In the matter of Shyam Kishan Saraf & Anr. vs. Atul Kumar, RP of Universal Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2023-07-26. Citation: TCN-2023-NCLAT-00344. The case involves an appeal against the order of the Adjudicating Authority, which rejected…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 26 Jul 2023
- **Citation:** TCN-2023-NCLAT-00344
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/shyam-kishan-saraf-anr-vs-atul-kumar-rp-of-universal-buildwell-pvt-ltd-anr-d6230b76

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against the order of the Adjudicating Authority, which rejected IA No. 2988/2023. The appellant filed IA No. 2988/2023 with several prayers, including deciding CA 1500/2019, CA 1501/2019, and IA 3089/2021 before deciding IA 5003/2021 for approval of a modified resolution plan, remanding the resolution plan for fresh consideration by the CoC, directing the RP to release the amended/correct IM, directing the RP to provide the altered Information Memorandum to the Applicants, directing the RP to provide the Applicants a seat in CoC, directing the RP to provide the Applicants with complete IA 5003/2021, and deciding all IA's and objections of Aggrieved Applicants before IA 5003/2021. The appellant also sought a forensic audit and any other order

…

## Facts

Shyam Kishan Saraf & Anr. filed an appeal against an order by the Adjudicating Authority that rejected IA No. 2988/2023. The appellant's prayers included multiple requests related to the resolution plan, such as deciding pending CAs and IAs before considering the approval of the modified resolution plan, remanding the resolution plan for fresh consideration, directing the RP to release amended information, providing the altered Information Memorandum to the Applicants, providing the Applicants a seat in CoC, providing the Applicants with complete IA 5003/2021, deciding all IA's and objections of Aggrieved Applicants before IA 5003/2021, ordering a forensic audit, and passing any other order deemed fit. The Respondent's counsel argued that the approval of the plan

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority's order …

**Ratio:** The court held that there was no merit in the appeal, implying that the Adjudicating

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the applicant had been filing several applications and

…

**Interpretation:** The court interpreted the appellant's repeated applications as an attempt to

…

**Application:** The court applied this reasoning to the specific facts of the case, where the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Barun M…
- **Appellants:** Shyam Kisha…
- **Respondents:** Universal…; Atul K…

## Timeline

- **2023-07-26 — Hearing of th…**: The court heard Mr. Shyam Kishan Saraf, who appeared in person, and considered the appeal…
- **2023-06-07 — Order of Adjudicating…**: The Adjudicating Authority passed an order rejecting IA No. 2988/2023, which is 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/shyam-kishan-saraf-anr-vs-atul-kumar-rp-of-universal-buildwell-pvt-ltd-anr-d6230b76