# In the matter of AMR Infrastructure Ltd. CA-725-(PB)-2018 in (IB)-02-(PB)-2017

> NCLT judgment dated 2018-08-14. Citation: TCN-2018-NCLT-00941. The application CA-725(PB)/2018 was filed under Section 21(6A)(b) of the IBC, read with…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 14 Aug 2018
- **Citation:** TCN-2018-NCLT-00941
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-chandigarh/amr-infrastructure-ltd-ca-725-pb-2018-in-ib-02-pb-2017-95e31476

## Summary

### Background

The application CA-725(PB)/2018 was filed under Section 21(6A)(b) of the IBC, read with Regulation 16A(2) of the IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) (third amendment) Regulation, 2018. The prayer in the application sought the appointment of Mr. Alok Kaushik as the Authorized Representative for one Class of Creditors, representing Real Estate Commercial creditors, and Ms. Maya Gupta as the Authorized Representative for Real Estate Residential creditors. This request stemmed from an amendment issued via ordinance on 06.06.2018, followed by a regulation issued on 03.07.2018, which applied to CIR processes initiated on or after 03.07.2018. The IRP sought clarification from IBBI via email on 05.07.2018.

## Facts

Nikhil Mehta & sons(HUF) & Ors. initiated a CIRP against AMR Infrastructure Ltd. An application, CA-725(PB)/2018, was filed under Section 21(6A)(b) of the IBC, read with Regulation 16A(2) of the IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) (third amendment) Regulation, 2018. The application sought the appointment of Mr. Alok Kaushik as the Authorized Representative for the Class of Creditors representing Real Estate Commercial interests, and Ms. Maya Gupta as the Authorized Representative for the Class of Creditors representing Real Estate Residential interests. The need for these appointments arose from an amendment issued via ordinance on 06.06.2018, followed by a regulation issued on 03.07.2018, which applied to CIR processes initiated on or

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the application for appointment of Authorized Representatives for different classes of …

**Ratio:** The ratio is that under Section 21(6A)(b) of the IBC and Regulation 16A(2) of the IBBI

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the application was in line with the amendment issued by

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of Section 21(6A)(b) and Regulation 16A(2) is that they

…

**Application:** The ratio and reasoning were applied to the specific facts of the case, where

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** M. M. K…; S. K. MOH…
- **Appellants:** Nikhil Mehta &…
- **Respondents:** AMR Infrastructure…

## Timeline

- **2018-06-06 — Ordinance Pro…**: An ordinance was promulgated, leading…
- **2018-07-03 — Regulation…**: A regulation was issued, applying to CIR…

---

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/amr-infrastructure-ltd-ca-725-pb-2018-in-ib-02-pb-2017-95e31476