# Aditya Raheja vs. Omkara Assets Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. & Ors

> NCLT judgment dated 2026-09-03. Citation: TCN-2026-NCLT-00989. Aditya Raheja filed applications (IA 2730/2026 and IA 2724/2026) under Section 60(5) of the…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 3 Sept 2026
- **Citation:** TCN-2026-NCLT-00989
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-mumbai/aditya-raheja-vs-neo-capricorn-plaza-pvt-ltd-9h82u

## Summary

### Background

Aditya Raheja filed applications (IA 2730/2026 and IA 2724/2026) under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, read with Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules, 2016, Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and Section 379 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The applications sought initiation of perjury proceedings against Omkara Assets Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. ('Omkara'), alleging that Omkara had repeatedly relied on multiple and mutually destructive Statements of Account, debt computations, and repayment histories before various judicial forums and the Resolution Professional. These alleged discrepancies formed the basis for invoking IBC jurisdiction, admitting claims, constituting the Committee of Creditors, allocating voting rights,

…

## Facts

Aditya Raheja filed applications (IA 2730/2026 and IA 2724/2026) under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, read with Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules, 2016, Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 195(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and Section 379 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

The applications seek initiation of perjury proceedings against Omkara Assets Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. ("Omkara").

Omkara is alleged to have repeatedly relied on multiple and mutually destructive Statements of Account, debt computations, repayment histories, default narratives, and liability figures before the NCLT, NCLAT, Supreme Court, and Resolution Professional.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether Omkara Assets Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. is guilty of perjury before the NCLT, NCLAT, and …

**Ratio:** The NCLT found that the alleged discrepancies were reconciliation differences and legal

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal had previously analyzed all documents, including those from the corporate

…

**Interpretation:** The court distinguished between mere inaccuracies or reconciliation differences

…

**Application:** The NCLT applied this distinction, finding that the alleged discrepancies,

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Prabhat…; Sushil Mahadeorao…
- **Appellants:** Aditya R…
- **Respondents:** NEO CAPRICORN…; GSTAAD HOTELS…; +1 more
- **Other parties:** Committee of…; Late Deepak…; +1 more
- **Advocates:** Akash Ag…; Ryan D'…; +2 more

## Timeline

- **2022-12-27 — Assignment Agreement…**: Date of the Assignment Agreement, prior to which Omkara allegedly altered repayment…
- **2023-02-09 — Information Utility…**: Omkara uploaded…

## 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-mumbai/aditya-raheja-vs-neo-capricorn-plaza-pvt-ltd-9h82u