# Canara Bank vs. Nishta Mall Management Company Private Limited

> NCLT judgment dated 2026-08-21. Citation: TCN-2026-NCLT-00914. The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was initiated against Nishta Mall Management…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 21 Aug 2026
- **Citation:** TCN-2026-NCLT-00914
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-mumbai/ts-party-canara-bank-vs-ms-nishta-mall-management-company-private-limited-z2v0g

## Summary

### Background

The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was initiated against Nishta Mall Management Company Private Limited (Corporate Debtor) based on a Section 7 application filed by Canara Bank. Mr. Manoj Kumar Agarwal was initially appointed as Interim Resolution Professional (IRP), later replaced by Mr. Dinesh Kumar Aggarwal as Resolution Professional (RP). The Committee of Creditors (CoC) was constituted, comprising Canara Bank and IFCI Limited. Despite multiple attempts to invite Expressions of Interest (EOIs) and receive resolution plans, only one plan was submitted by M/s. Surendra Fiscal Services Private Limited. Major assets of the Corporate Debtor were in the possession of Future Retail Limited and Future Lifestyle Fashions Limited, leading to a NIL valuation

…

## Facts

The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was initiated against Nishta Mall Management Company Private Limited (Corporate Debtor) based on a Section 7 application filed by Canara Bank.

The application for CIRP was admitted by order dated 24.03.2025, and Mr. Manoj Kumar Agarwal was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP).

A public announcement regarding the initiation of CIRP was made on 26.03.2025, inviting creditors to submit claims by 07.04.2025.

Claims were received from two financial creditors: Canara Bank (77.81% voting share) and IFCI Limited (22.19% voting share); no claims were received from operational creditors.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Corporate Debtor, Nishta Mall Management Company Private Limited, should be liquidated …

**Ratio:** The Adjudicating Authority must pass a liquidation order under Section 33(2) of the IBC

…

**Reasoning:** Despite multiple publications of Form G and extensions, no viable resolution plan was

…

**Interpretation:** Section 33(2) of the IBC mandates the Adjudicating Authority to pass a

…

**Application:** Given the CoC's unanimous decision to liquidate, the failure to receive an

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Vinay…; Charanjeet Singh…
- **Appellants:** Canara…; Dinesh Kumar…
- **Respondents:** M/s. Nishta Mall…; Nishta Mall…
- **Other parties:** IFCI Li…; Neha Jain…; +2 more
- **Advocates:** Manisha…

## Timeline

- **2025-03-24 — CIRP Initiation and IRP…**: CIRP initiated against Corporate Debtor; application admitted, and Mr. Manoj Kumar…
- **2025-03-26 — Public Announcement for…**: Public announcement made regarding the initiation of CIRP, inviting creditors to submit…

---

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/ts-party-canara-bank-vs-ms-nishta-mall-management-company-private-limited-z2v0g