# In the matter of Mukesh Kumar Aggarwal Vs. Anurag Gupta & Anr. Civil Appeal No. 3073-2020

> SC judgment dated 2020-11-17. Citation: TCN-2020-SC-00011. The appellant, Mukesh Kumar Aggarwal, filed a civil appeal against the respondents, Anurag Gupta &…

- **Court:** SC
- **Order date:** 17 Nov 2020
- **Citation:** TCN-2020-SC-00011
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/supreme-court-of-india/mukesh-kumar-aggarwal-vs-anurag-gupta-anr-civil-appeal-no-3073-2020-8c59ec13

## Summary

### Background

The appellant, Mukesh Kumar Aggarwal, filed a civil appeal against the respondents, Anurag Gupta & Anr., challenging the admission of an insolvency application. The appellant argued that the adjudicating authority (NCLAT) erred in admitting the application because there was no financial debt due to the first respondent from the company. The appellant contended that the insolvency application was an attempt to avoid complying with a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) dated January 27, 2016, where the first respondent, as a former director, pledged his shareholding to secure a payment of Rs 20.5 crores to the appellant. The appellant also pointed to reports from the Regional Director in the Ministry of Corporate Affairs indicating no outstanding loan to the first

…

## Facts

Mukesh Kumar Aggarwal (appellant) filed an appeal against Anurag Gupta & Anr. (respondents) challenging the admission of an insolvency application. The appellant argued that the NCLAT erred in admitting the application as there was no financial debt owed by the company to the first respondent. The appellant claims the insolvency application was an attempt to avoid complying with an MOU dated January 27, 2016, where the first respondent, as an erstwhile Director, pledged his shareholding to secure a payment of Rs 20.5 crores to the appellant. The appellant also presented reports from the Regional Director in the Ministry of Corporate Affairs indicating no outstanding loan to the first respondent. The relevance of these facts lies in establishing whether a 'financial

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the adjudicating authority and the NCLAT erred in admitting the insolvency application in …

**Ratio:** The existence of a 'financial debt' as defined under Section 5(8) of the Insolvency and

…

**Reasoning:** The court considered the appellant's argument that no financial debt existed, supported

…

**Interpretation:** Section 5(8) of the IBC defines 'financial debt' as a debt along with interest,

…

**Application:** In this case, the appellant argued that no financial debt existed because the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Dr Dhananjaya Y…; Indu Mal…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Mukesh Kumar…
- **Respondents:** Anurag…
- **Advocates:** Jayant…; Swapnil…; +3 more

## Timeline

- **2016-01-27 — MOU Date…**: Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) dated January 27, 2016, under which the first…
- **2019-10-10 — NCLT Orde…**: Date of the impugned…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 5(8) — Definitions](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-5)

---

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/mukesh-kumar-aggarwal-vs-anurag-gupta-anr-civil-appeal-no-3073-2020-8c59ec13