# Kalyani Transco v. M/s Bhushan Power and Steel Limited & Others > SC judgment dated 2025-09-26. Citation: TCN-2025-SC-00116. This batch of six appeals, filed under Section 62 of the IBC, challenges a common NCLAT order dated… - **Court:** SC - **Order date:** 26 Sept 2025 - **Citation:** TCN-2025-SC-00116 - **Category:** IBC - **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/supreme-court-of-india/kalyani-transco-vs-ms-bhushan-power-and-steel-limited-and-others-ejyg0 ## Summary ### Background This batch of six appeals, filed under Section 62 of the IBC, challenges a common NCLAT order dated February 17, 2020, related to the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Proceedings (CIRP) of M/s Bhushan Power and Steel Limited (BPSL). BPSL was identified by the RBI as a major corporate defaulter. Punjab National Bank initiated CIRP, and JSW Steel Ltd.'s Resolution Plan was approved by the CoC and NCLT (with conditions). The NCLAT modified these conditions. The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) subsequently issued a Provisional Attachment Order (PAO) against BPSL's assets, leading to further legal challenges and delays in the plan's implementation. An earlier Supreme Court order dated May 2, 2025, had quashed the NCLT/NCLAT judgments, rejected JSW's plan, and directed … ## Facts The Banking Regulation Act, 1949, was amended on May 4, 2017, empowering the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to direct Indian Banks to initiate CIRP against major corporate defaulters. On June 13, 2017, the RBI identified 12 large corporate defaulters, including M/s Bhushan Power and Steel Limited (BPSL), with outstanding debts of Rs. 5,000 crore and above. Punjab National Bank (Respondent No. 5) filed a Company Petition under Section 7 of the IBC, which the NCLT admitted on July 26, 2017, commencing the CIRP against BPSL. On July 28, 2017, the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) invited claims from creditors and stakeholders, admitting claims of Rs. 4,72,04,51,78,073.88 for Financial Creditors and Rs. 6,21,37,61,735 for Operational Creditors. … ## Issues and analysis ### Issue 1: Whether erstwhile promoters have locus standi to file appeals under Section 62 of the Insolvency … **Ratio:** Personal guarantors of a Corporate Debtor are "persons aggrieved" under … **Reasoning:** The term "persons aggrieved" under Sections 61 and 62 of the IBC must be given … **Interpretation:** Sections 61 and 62 of the IBC allow "any person aggrieved" to appeal. … **Application:** The Court decided to hear the appeals on their merits, rather than dismissing … ## Parties - **Judges:** B.R. G…; SATISH CHANDRA…; +1 more - **Appellants:** KALYANI T…; Sanjay Singhal &…; +5 more - **Respondents:** M/s Bhushan Power…; M/S Bhushan Power…; +2 more - **Other parties:** 8th Edition…; Resolutio…; +20 more - **Advocates:** Dhruv M…; Balbir…; +10 more ## Timeline - **2017-05-04 — Banking Regulation Act…**: The Banking Regulation Act, 1949, was amended, empowering the Reserve Bank of India (RBI)… - **2017-06-13 — RBI identifies BPSL as…**: The RBI, via circular, identified 12 large corporate defaulters, including M/s Bhushan… ## Legal provisions - [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 62 — Appeal to Supreme Court](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-62) --- 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/supreme-court-of-india/kalyani-transco-vs-ms-bhushan-power-and-steel-limited-and-others-ejyg0