# Ajay Kishore Aggarwal & Anr. vs. Rahul Jindal (Interim Resolution Professional) & Ors.

> NCLT judgment dated 2026-08-13. Citation: TCN-2026-NCLT-00962. The Applicants, legal representatives of Late Sh. Ishwar Chand, claim a 09/49 undivided share…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 13 Aug 2026
- **Citation:** TCN-2026-NCLT-00962
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-chandigarh/ajay-kishore-aggarwal-anr-vs-rahul-jindal-jyh4r

## Summary

### Background

The Applicants, legal representatives of Late Sh. Ishwar Chand, claim a 09/49 undivided share (0 Kanal 9 Marla) of land within the Corporate Debtor's project, which they allege was never conveyed and is now encroached upon. They sought demarcation from revenue officials, which was denied citing the CIRP moratorium. They also filed a civil suit for partition, title, and demarcation before a Civil Court. They approached the NCLT seeking release of the land, an injunction against alienation/construction, action against the Resolution Professional under Section 70 of the Code, a reference to IBBI, and a stay of CIRP/Resolution Plan proceedings until the property is carved out and possession delivered.

## Facts

Late Sh. Ishwar Chand was originally recorded as owner of 150 Kanal 18 Marla of land, including Khasra No. 18/3, per the Jamabandi for the year 1999-2000.

By two registered sale deeds dated 19.01.2007, Late Sh. Ishwar Chand sold 150 Kanal 9 Marla of this holding to the Corporate Debtor, through Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 in their capacity as directors thereof.

The Applicants contend that a residual 0 Kanal 9 Marla, being a 09/49 share of Khasra No. 18/3, was retained by their predecessor and was never conveyed, and that it came to be enclosed within the boundary wall of the 'Ess Vee Apartments' project in sector 20 Panchkula.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the dispute raised in the present Application, concerning partition and demarcation of an …

**Ratio:** A claim for partition of joint property, especially an undivided share, falls under the

…

**Reasoning:** The 9 Marla in question forms part of a larger, undivided holding of 2 Kanal 9 Marla in

…

**Interpretation:** Section 60(5) of the IBC grants the NCLT jurisdiction over matters 'arising out

…

**Application:** The Tribunal relied on *Ram Chander v. Bhim Singh, 2008(3) RCR (Civil) 685*,

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** SH. KHETRABASI…; Sh. Shishir…
- **Appellants:** Ajay Kishore…; Kamal Kishore…
- **Respondents:** Samar Estates…; Rahul Jindal…; +3 more
- **Other parties:** Punjab & Si…; Rahul J…
- **Advocates:** N.S. Sw…; Ms Harshmir Kaur…; +6 more

## Timeline

- **1999-2000 — Original Ownership…**: Late Sh. Ishwar Chand was recorded as owner of 150 Kanal 18 Marla of land, including…
- **2006-03-27 — Licence…**: Licence No. 610 granted to the Corporate Debtor by the Department of Town and Country…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 60(5) — Adjudicating Authority for corporate persons](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-60)

---

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/nclt-chandigarh/ajay-kishore-aggarwal-anr-vs-rahul-jindal-jyh4r