# In the matter of Rajan Chadha & Anr. vs. Sanjay Arora

> SC judgment dated 2025-04-23. Citation: TCN-2025-SC-00022. The case involves an appeal against a judgment and final order of the High Court of Delhi, which…

- **Court:** SC
- **Order date:** 23 Apr 2025
- **Citation:** TCN-2025-SC-00022
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/supreme-court-of-india/rajan-chadha-anr-vs-sanjay-arora-250ebc68

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against a judgment and final order of the High Court of Delhi, which dismissed a contempt petition filed by the Appellants. The dispute originates from a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the company RBT Private Ltd, the Appellants (Rajan Chadha and Rajiv Chadha), the Respondent (Sanjay Arora), and others, concerning the transfer of shareholding and reorganization of the company's management. The Appellants alleged that the Respondent failed to discharge his obligations under the MoU, leading to arbitration proceedings and various orders from the High Court and the arbitrator. The NCLT initiated Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the company, leading to a moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC. The Appellants

…

## Facts

Rajan Chadha and Rajiv Chadha (Appellants) held a combined shareholding of 51.36% in RBT Private Ltd. Sanjay Arora (Respondent) held 25%, and Sumit Gupta held 23.64%. A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was executed on December 21, 2019, for the transfer of shareholding and reorganization of the company's management. The Respondent was to purchase the entire shareholding of the Appellants and run the company. The MoU included an arbitration clause for dispute resolution. The Appellants alleged the Respondent failed to discharge his obligations under the MoU, siphoning off assets and defaulting on loan payments. They issued a legal notice and initiated arbitration. The Appellants filed a petition in the High Court under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act, seeking to

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the learned Single Judge of the High Court erred in reviewing the order of another learned …

**Ratio:** The principle of judicial propriety dictates that one Judge of the same court should not

…

**Reasoning:** The Supreme Court reasoned that the second Single Judge of the High Court, in passing the

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of the legal issue revolves around the principle that a

…

**Application:** The application of the ratio and reasoning to the facts of the case is that the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** B.R. G…; AUGUSTINE GEORGE…
- **Appellants:** Rajan C…
- **Respondents:** RBT Privat…; Sanjay…
- **Other parties:** Over Tu…

## Timeline

- **2019-12-21 — MoU Exec…**: A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was made and executed by and between the company,…
- **2020-03-17 — Arbitration…**: Appellants issued a notice in terms of Section 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 9 — Application for initiation of corporate insolvency…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-9)

---

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/rajan-chadha-anr-vs-sanjay-arora-250ebc68