# In the matter of Sunil Kumar Agarwal & Anr.  vs. Anand Sonbhadra, RP of Shubhkamna Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2024-10-25. Citation: TCN-2024-NCLAT-00139. The case involves an appeal against an order by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 25 Oct 2024
- **Citation:** TCN-2024-NCLAT-00139
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/sunil-kumar-agarwal-anr-vs-anand-sonbhadra-rp-of-shubhkamna-buildtech-pvt-ltd-or-fc550a42

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against an order by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal) regarding the inclusion of lease rentals and lease premium during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) period as part of the CIRP costs. The resolution plan submitted by the Appellants was approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC). During the pendency of the application, New Okhla Industrial Development Authority/Respondent No. 2 and Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority/Respondent No. 3 raised objections regarding outstanding lease rentals and premium. The Adjudicating Authority directed the objectors to submit details of the lease rentals and premium accrued during the CIRP period to the Resolution Professional and the Successful

…

## Facts

M/s Concord Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (Operational Creditor) filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against M/s Shubhkamna Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. (Corporate Debtor), which was admitted on 26.11.2018. The resolution plan submitted by the Appellants was approved by the CoC on 09.10.2019 with 87.57% vote share on 17.10.2019. The RP filed CA No. 485 of 2019 under Section 30(6) and 31 of the Code for approval of the resolution plan. During the pendency of the application, New Okhla Industrial Development Authority/Respondent No. 2 and Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority/Respondent No. 3 raised objections, claiming outstanding lease rental and premium. NOIDA claimed Rs. 27,65,02,686/- and GNIDA claimed Rs. 1,00,95,82,526/-.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority can modify the resolution plan approved by the CoC by including …

**Ratio:** The Adjudicating Authority's power to modify a resolution plan is limited. Section 31 of

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the Adjudicating Authority exceeded its jurisdiction in modifying

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of Section 31 of the IBC suggests that the Adjudicating

…

**Application:** In this case, the Adjudicating Authority's order to include lease rentals and

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Rakesh Kuma…; Indevar P…
- **Appellants:** Sunil Kumar…
- **Respondents:** Shubhkamna…; Anand Son…

## Timeline

- **2018-11-26 — Admission o…**: The application against Shubhkamna…
- **2019-10-09 — Approval of Resolution…**: The resolution plan submitted by the Appellants was approved by the CoC in its 6th…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 9 — Application for initiation of corporate insolvency…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-9)

---

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/sunil-kumar-agarwal-anr-vs-anand-sonbhadra-rp-of-shubhkamna-buildtech-pvt-ltd-or-fc550a42