# Siddharth Satish Katariya vs. Central Bank of India Limited & Anr.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2026-09-01. Citation: TCN-2026-NCLAT-00265. Siddharth Satish Katariya, ex-Director of Superfine Metals Pvt. Ltd. (Corporate Debtor),…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 1 Sept 2026
- **Citation:** TCN-2026-NCLAT-00265
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/siddharth-satish-katariya-vs-superfine-metals-pvt-ltd-t0l4y

## Summary

### Background

Siddharth Satish Katariya, ex-Director of Superfine Metals Pvt. Ltd. (Corporate Debtor), appealed against an NCLT order admitting a Section 7 IBC application filed by Central Bank of India (Financial Creditor). The core dispute revolved around whether the dates of default for Cash Credit and Ad-Hoc facilities fell within the Section 10A protected period (25.03.2020 to 24.03.2021), which bars the initiation of CIRP. The Bank initially stated the default date as 29.11.2020 (within Section 10A) but later amended it to 10.03.2020 (Cash Credit) and 24.03.2020 (Ad-Hoc) to fall outside this period, after the Corporate Debtor raised the Section 10A bar.

## Facts

Siddharth Satish Katariya, ex-Director of Superfine Metals Pvt. Ltd. (Corporate Debtor), filed an appeal under Section 61 of the IBC, 2016.

The appeal challenges an NCLT order dated 16.07.2026, which admitted a Section 7 application filed by Central Bank of India (Financial Creditor).

The Corporate Debtor is an MSME unit engaged in manufacturing and processing ferrous, non-ferrous, and alloy extruded products.

Central Bank of India is the Financial Creditor and Respondent No.1, while Mrs. Megha Agarwal is the Interim Resolution Professional and Respondent No.2.

The Bank originally filed the Section 7 petition claiming an aggregate default of Rs.92,45,80,781/- from Cash Credit, Term Loan, Funded Interest Term Loan (FITL), and Cash Credit Ad-Hoc facilities.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the default with respect to Cash Credit …

**Ratio:** The default for the Cash Credit facility occurred within the Section 10A protected period

…

**Reasoning:** The court referred to Section 3(12) of the IBC, which defines "default" as

…

**Interpretation:** The court interpreted "due and payable" strictly, requiring both

…

**Application:** Applying this interpretation, the interest on the Cash Credit facility, even if

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Mohammad Faiz…; Naresh Sa…
- **Appellants:** Siddharth Satish…
- **Respondents:** Superfine Metals…; Central Bank of…; +1 more
- **Advocates:** Krishnendu…; Saurav Ag…; +15 more

## Timeline

- **2013-11-28 — Cash Credit Facility…**: Initial sanction of Cash Credit facility, with Clause 21 requiring interest to be…
- **2016-11-18 — Working Capital Consortium Agreement and Joint…**: Execution of Working Capital Consortium Agreement and Joint Deed of Hypothecation. Clause…

---

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/siddharth-satish-katariya-vs-superfine-metals-pvt-ltd-t0l4y