# Ms Sonal Sumit Mehta vs. Mr Chirag R Shah & Anr.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2026-10-05. Citation: TCN-2026-NCLAT-00291. An application (IA No. 5856/2026) was filed under Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016 by Shri…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 5 Oct 2026
- **Citation:** TCN-2026-NCLAT-00291
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/sonal-sumit-mehta-vs-chirag-r-shah-ors-nvt90

## Summary

### Background

An application (IA No. 5856/2026) was filed under Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016 by Shri B.D. Agarwal, a shareholder and personal guarantor of M/s Krystal Stone Exports Ltd (the Corporate Debtor). The application sought to recall the NCLAT judgment and order dated 17.07.2026 in Company Appeal (AT)(Ins) No.1262/2026. This NCLAT order had set aside an NCLT order dated 01.06.2026, which directed Respondent No.1 to deposit the balance resolution amount and excluded time for property vacation. Agarwal contended that the 17.07.2026 order was passed without him being impleaded or served, despite his status as a stakeholder whose opposition was noted in the 01.06.2026 order. The dispute centered on the unconditional nature of the resolution plan, payment timelines, and the

…

## Facts

An application (IA No. 5856/2026) was filed under Rule 11 of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules, 2016.

The applicant for recall is Shri B.D. Agarwal, a shareholder and personal guarantor of M/s Krystal Stone Exports Ltd (the Corporate Debtor).

The application seeks recall of the NCLAT judgment and order dated 17.07.2026 in Company Appeal (AT)(Ins) No.1262/2026.

The NCLAT order dated 17.07.2026 set aside an NCLT order dated 01.06.2026 in IA(IBC)/2044(MB)/2026.

The NCLT order dated 01.06.2026 had directed Respondent No.1 to deposit the balance resolution amount of Rs.14,60,56,036/- within 45 days with 12% interest and excluded additional time for property vacation.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the application for recall of the NCLAT order dated 17.07.2026 is maintainable, given the …

**Ratio:** An application for recall by a party who was not impleaded or served in the original

…

**Reasoning:** The applicant (B.D. Agarwal) was not a party to IA 2044/2026. His counsel sought time to

…

**Interpretation:** Procedural rights of suspended directors are subservient to the IBC's primary

…

**Application:** The NCLAT dismissed IA No. 5856/2026, stating the applicant has no right on

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Yogesh K…; Barun M…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Ms Sonal Sumit…; Mr Vikas…; +1 more
- **Respondents:** Krystal Stone…; Mr Chirag…; +1 more
- **Other parties:** Monitoring…; Bansidhar (B.D.)…
- **Advocates:** Mr Ramji Srinivasa…; Mr Abhishe…; +10 more

## Timeline

- **2024-01-09 — Rent Agreement…**: Mr. B.D. Agarwal, acting as Director of the Corporate Debtor, executed a rent agreement…
- **2024-03-11 — High Court Obs…**: The Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, observed that Mr. B.D. Agarwal was never…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 14 — Moratorium](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-14)

---

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/sonal-sumit-mehta-vs-chirag-r-shah-ors-nvt90