# In the matter of Vikas Dahiya Vs.
Arrow Engineering Limited & Anr. Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No. 699 of 2022

> NCLAT judgment dated 2022-08-05. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLAT-00296. The case involves two appeals against a common order passed by the Adjudicating Authority…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 5 Aug 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLAT-00296
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/vikas-dahiya-vs-arrow-engineering-limited-anr-company-appeal-1e6992c1

## Summary

### Background

The case involves two appeals against a common order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) in IA No. 830/NCLT/AHM/2021 in CP(IB) No. 268/NCLT/AHM/09/2020. Arrow Engineering Ltd., a Financial Creditor, filed an application before the NCLT Ahmedabad to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Act, 2016 (IBC) against the Corporate Debtor. The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the application. Aggrieved by this order, the Applicant preferred an appeal before the NCLAT. The NCLAT passed a detailed order in Company Appeal(AT)(Ins) No. 183 of 2021, formulating points regarding limitation, relationship between Financial Creditor and Corporate Debtor, and acknowledgement of debt. The NCLAT concluded that the

…

## Facts

1. Arrow Engineering Ltd., a Financial Creditor, filed an application before the NCLT Ahmedabad to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against a Corporate Debtor.
2. The NCLT initially dismissed the application.
3. The NCLAT reversed the NCLT's decision in Company Appeal(AT)(Ins) No. 183 of 2021, directing the NCLT to pass a consequential order.
4. An appeal against the NCLAT's order was dismissed by the Supreme Court.
5. Subsequently, the NCLT allowed the application, commencing CIRP and appointing an IRP.
6. Mr. Vikas Dahiya, the Ex-Director of Golden Tobacco Ltd. Corporate Debtor and Oval Investment Pvt. Ltd. claiming to be shareholder, filed these appeals, respectively.
7. The Appellants contended that the Adjudicating Authority's order was silent on

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Appellants in both the appeals are competent to challenge the order passed by the …

**Ratio:** The principle of res judicata, as enunciated under Section 11 of the Code of Civil

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLAT reasoned that the issues raised by the Appellants had already been decided in

…

**Interpretation:** The NCLAT interpreted the principle of res judicata as a fundamental doctrine

…

**Application:** The NCLAT applied the principle of res judicata to the facts of the case,

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; M. Satyanarayana…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Vikas D…
- **Respondents:** Arrow Engineering…; Arrow Engineering…

## Timeline

- **2020-01-01 — CP(IB) No. 268/NCLT/2009…**: Arrow Engineering Ltd., a Financial Creditor, filed an application before the NCLT…
- **2021-01-01 — Company Appeal(AT)(Ins)…**: NCLAT reversed the NCLT's decision, directing…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 7 — Initiation of corporate insolvency resolution…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-7)

---

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/vikas-dahiya-vs-arrow-engineering-limited-anr-company-appeal-1e6992c1