Amit Nagar Erstwhile Director Of M/S. ... vs Manoj Kulshrestha Resolution ...

Amit Nagar, ...Appellant(s) Erstwhile Director of Ascot Projects Pvt. Ltd.

Versus

Manoj Kulshrestha, ...Respondent(s) RP Intellicity Business Park Pvt. Ltd. &Ors. Present: For Appellant : Mr. Sunil Fernandes, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Siddanth Singh, Mr. Pankaj Agarwal, Mr. Shashwat Srivastava, Ms. Lipsa Pattanaik, Ms. Diksha Dadu, Advocates For Respondents : Mr. Sumesh Dhawan, Ms. Vatsala Kak and Mr. Shaurya Shyam, Ms. Shenaz Khan, Advocates for R-1.

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

01.05.2025: Heard Counsel for the Appellant as well as Counsel for

the Respondent.

2. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 18.02.2025

passed by National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench, Court-V by

which order Section 7 application filed by the Financial Creditor through

Resolution Professional has been admitted.

3. When the appeal was taken by this Tribunal preliminary objection

was raised by the Respondent that Appellant has no locus to challenge the

order.

4. Counsel for the Respondent submits that appellant was erstwhile

Director of the Corporate Debtor who had resigned which is recorded in the

order dated 09.01.2020 of the order of the Adjudicating Authority. It is

submitted that the appellant had no concern with the Corporate Debtor on

the date when order of admission was passed. Appellant has no locus to

challenge the order. It is further submitted that it is only the Suspended

Director of the Corporate Debtor who can challenge the order admitting

Section 7 application whereas the appellant is not the Suspended Director

since he was not in the Board of Management when the application was filed

against the corporate debtor as well as the day when the order was passed.

5. Shri Fernandes, Ld. Sr. Counsel for the Appellant submits that

appellant has never resigned in fact he was removed in the year 2020 by the

Financial Creditor.

6. Appellant submits that he has already filed IA No. 1655 of 2024

under Section 65 of the IBC, 2016 which also was rejected by different order

of the same day.

7. We have considered the submissions from the Counsels of the

parties and perused the record.

8. Order under challenge in this appeal is order 18.02.2025 passed in

Section 7 application filed by the Financial Creditor admitting Section 7

application. Whether the appellant had resigned or had been removed, the

fact remains that he is not continuing as a Director since 2020. When the

appellant is not in the Board of Management which was running the

Corporate Debtor at the time when Section 7 application was filed or the time when order was passed admitting Section 7 application, the appellant

shall have no locus to challenge the order admitting Section 7 application.

9. We fail to see any locus in the appellant to challenge the order

admitting Section 7 application. In so far as I.A. No. 1655 of 2024 is

concerned present appeal is not against the order rejecting the said I.A.

10. We thus are of the view that this appeal cannot be entertained and

accepting the objection of Respondent. We dismiss the appeal.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)

[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) sr/nn