# Mr. Rajan Kumar & Anr. vs. Mr. Subodh Kumar Aggarwal, RP of BIL Vyapar Limited & Anr.

> NCLT judgment dated 2026-07-09. Citation: TCN-2026-NCLT-00685. The Applicants, Mr. Rajan Kumar and Mr. Bhimani Aliraza Rafikhusen, entered into an Agreement…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 9 Jul 2026
- **Citation:** TCN-2026-NCLT-00685
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-kolkata/mr-rajan-kumar-anr-vs-mr-subodh-kumar-aggarwal-rp-of-bil-vyapar-limited-anr-bhlt6

## Summary

### Background

The Applicants, Mr. Rajan Kumar and Mr. Bhimani Aliraza Rafikhusen, entered into an Agreement to Sale with the Corporate Debtor (Binani Industries Limited, later Bil Vyapar Limited) on 24.05.2025 for office properties in Ahmedabad, paying Rs. 60,00,000/- out of Rs. 63,00,000/- and taking possession. The execution of the sale deed and registration was pending due to the requirement of prior permission from the Deputy Collector under The Gujarat Prohibition of Transfer of Immovable Property and Provision for Protection of Tenants from Eviction from Premises in Disturbed Areas Act, 1991. Subsequently, the Corporate Debtor entered Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) on 13.11.2025, and a moratorium was declared. The Applicants filed an application under Section

…

## Facts

Mr. Rajan Kumar and Mr. Bhimani Aliraza Rafikhusen (Applicants) were joint purchasers in an Agreement to Sale dated 24.05.2025 with the Corporate Debtor.

The agreement was for the sale of Office No. 705 and 706, situated at Sakar-II, Ahmedabad, for a total consideration of Rs. 63,00,000/-.

The Applicants paid Rs. 60,00,000/- on 21.05.2024, prior to the execution of the agreement.

Possession of the scheduled property was handed over to the Applicants on 25.05.2025, and they have been in peaceful, continuous, and lawful possession since.

The scheduled property falls under The Gujarat Prohibition of Transfer of Immovable Property and Provision for Protection of Tenants from Eviction from Premises in Disturbed Areas Act, 1991.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the applicants are entitled to seek enforcement of an agreement to sell executed prior to …

**Ratio:** An agreement to sell does not, by itself, create any interest or charge on immovable

…

**Reasoning:** Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, clearly defines 'sale' as a transfer of

…

**Interpretation:** The NCLAT in M/s Indo World Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. Shri Mukesh Gupta RP of

…

**Application:** In the present case, despite the agreement to sell, partial payment, and

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Labh S…; Rekha Kantilal…
- **Appellants:** Rajan K…; Bhimani Aliraza…
- **Respondents:** Binani Industries…; BIL Vyapar…; +2 more
- **Other parties:** Rachna Jhunjhunwal…
- **Advocates:** Joy S…; Swapna Ch…; +2 more

## Timeline

- **2024-05-21 — Partial Payme…**: Applicants paid Rs. 60,00,000/-…
- **2025-05-24 — Agreement to Sale Executed & Permission…**: Agreement to Sale executed between Applicants and Corporate Debtor. Application for…

## 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-kolkata/mr-rajan-kumar-anr-vs-mr-subodh-kumar-aggarwal-rp-of-bil-vyapar-limited-anr-bhlt6