# Tata Capital Limited vs. Mr. Sanjay Mahajan

> NCLAT judgment dated 2026-10-06. Citation: TCN-2026-NCLAT-00289. Tata Capital Limited, a secured financial creditor, extended credit facilities to a Corporate…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 6 Oct 2026
- **Citation:** TCN-2026-NCLAT-00289
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/tata-capital-limited-vs-sanjay-mahajan-q8ii4

## Summary

### Background

Tata Capital Limited, a secured financial creditor, extended credit facilities to a Corporate Debtor, secured by hypothecated assets. Following the Corporate Debtor's default, CIRP and subsequent liquidation proceedings were initiated, and Mr. Sanjay Ramdas Mahajan was appointed as Liquidator. Tata Capital filed its claim in Form D, indicating it had not relinquished its security interest but also marked 'NIL' for security details. The Appellant actively participated in Stakeholders' Consultation Committee (SCC) meetings. After a proposed compromise scheme under Section 230 of the Companies Act, 2013 was rejected on 04.02.2025, Tata Capital, on 19.02.2025, sent an email to the Liquidator, for the first time formally requesting to realize its security interest

…

## Facts

Tata Capital Limited (Appellant) sanctioned various credit facilities in favour of the Corporate Debtor.

Specific equipment and assets of the Corporate Debtor were validly and legally hypothecated in favour of the Appellant, creating a secured interest.

The Corporate Debtor committed defaults in repayment, and its loan accounts were classified as NPA.

CIRP and subsequent liquidation proceedings were initiated against the Corporate Debtor.

The Corporate Debtor was placed under liquidation under Section 33(1) of the Code.

Mr. Sanjay Ramdas Mahajan was appointed as Liquidator.

The Appellant filed its claim in Form-D as a secured financial creditor, disclosing details of assets and security interest.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Appellant, as a secured creditor, validly and within the prescribed period, exercised …

**Ratio:** A secured creditor must validly and timely exercise its option under Section 52 read with

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLAT found that the Appellant did not make a clear written request for exclusion and

…

**Interpretation:** Section 52(3) cannot be invoked without a valid and timely election under

…

**Application:** The Appellant's actions, including the timing of its email and participation in

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Sharad Kumar…; Arun Ba…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Tata Capital…; Erstwhile Tata…; +1 more
- **Respondents:** Sanjay Ma…
- **Other parties:** Stakeholders…; Sanjay Ramdas…
- **Advocates:** Abhishek…; Ekta Bh…; +5 more

## Timeline

- **2023-02-24 — CIRP Admi…**: The Corporate Debtor…
- **2024-08-13 — Liquidation Process…**: Upon rejection of the Resolution Plan, Liquidation process of CD was initiated under…

## 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/tata-capital-limited-vs-sanjay-mahajan-q8ii4