# Ramita Batra & Anju Choudhary vs. Mr. Narendra Kumar Sharma, Resolution Professional, Spaze Towers Pvt. Ltd.

> NCLT judgment dated 2026-10-05. Citation: TCN-2026-NCLT-01113. The Applicants, Ramita Batra and Anju Choudhary, filed an application (I.A. 508 ND 2026) under…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 5 Oct 2026
- **Citation:** TCN-2026-NCLT-01113
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-new-delhi/spaze-towers-pvt-ltd-y1n31

## Summary

### Background

The Applicants, Ramita Batra and Anju Choudhary, filed an application (I.A. 508 ND 2026) under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, read with Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules, 2016. They sought to place on record their objections to the Resolution Plan for Spaze Towers Private Limited, which was approved by the Committee of Creditors in its 14th Meeting held on 17.11.2025 & 18.11.2025. The Applicants also requested the rejection of the said Resolution Plan and a direction to the Resolution Professional to invite fresh bids.

## Facts

Ramita Batra and Anju Choudhary filed an application (I.A. 508 ND 2026) under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules, 2016.

The application sought to take on record objections to the Resolution Plan for Spaze Towers Private Limited.

The application requested the rejection of the Resolution Plan for Spaze Towers Private Limited.

The application sought a direction to the Resolution Professional to invite fresh bids for a Resolution Plan.

The Resolution Plan for Spaze Towers Private Limited was resolved to be put up for approval before the Committee of Creditors in its 14th Meeting held on 17.11.2025 & 18.11.2025.

The Adjudicating Authority had previously recorded findings in I.A. No. 6166 of 2025.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the reliefs sought by the Applicants, including taking on record objections, rejecting the …

**Ratio:** An application seeking reliefs identical or similar to those already considered and

…

**Reasoning:** The Adjudicating Authority had already recorded findings and reasoning in I.A. No. 6166

…

**Interpretation:** The principle of judicial consistency dictates that matters already decided by

…

**Application:** Since the reliefs sought in I.A. 508 ND 2026 are identical/similar to those

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** MAHENDRA KHANDELWA…; ATUL CHAT…
- **Appellants:** RAMITA…; ANJU CHOU…
- **Respondents:** Spaze Towers Pvt.…; Narendra Kumar…; +1 more
- **Other parties:** Committee of…; Vivek Khanna &…
- **Advocates:** Aravind Subramania…; Upamanyu…; +5 more

## Timeline

- **2025-11-17 — CoC Meet…**: The 14th Meeting of the Committee of Creditors was held on 17.11.2025 & 18.11.2025, where…
- **2026-10-05 — Prior Application…**: I.A. No. 6166 of 2025, seeking identical/similar reliefs, was dismissed by the…

## 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-new-delhi/spaze-towers-pvt-ltd-y1n31