C E Fernandes vs Chirag Rajendrakumar Shah (Liquidator ...

IN THE MATTER OF: C.E. Fernandes ...Appellants Versus Chirag Rajendrakumar Shah ...Respondents (Liquidator of GEI Industrial Systems Ltd) & Ors.

Present: For Appellant : Mr. Sumant Batra, Mr. Sarthak Bhandari, Mr. Riya Kaur Arora, Mr. Pulkit Kapoor and M/s Jolly Singh, Advocates. For Respondents : Ms. Anjali Sharma, Mr. Mandeep Singh Vinaik and Mr. S.K. Sagar, Advocates for R1. Mr. Naresh Kumar Sharma, Advocate.

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

09.02.2026: Heard counsel for the appellant as well as Ld. Counsel for

the Liquidator.

2. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 09.10.2025 by which

order Adjudicating Authority has allowed IA No. 181 of 2018 and has

dismissed other applications, by IA No. 181 of 2018. RP had filed the

application under Section 33(2) of the IBC seeking orders for liquidation.

3. In the present case NCLT by order dated 20.07.2017 in TP No. 61/2019

admitted application Section 9 of the IBC. After admission of the application

public announcement was made in which extension was granted for a period

of CIRP. RP was also directed to consider the plan of suspended management. The corporate debtor being MSME, the promoters have given the plan which

was rejected, against which order; appeal was filed and the appeal was also

dismissed by this Tribunal on 25.07.2022. Subsequently, the applications

came for consideration and the Adjudicating Authority has allowed the

liquidation application by appointing the Liquidator.

4. Aggrieved by the said order this appeal, has been filed by the appellant

who is the promoter of the corporate debtor. Shri Sumant Bartra, Ld. Counsel

appearing for the appellant submits that the Creditors i.e, the Bank are

interested in considering the plan of the appellant, hence an opportunity be

given for reconsideration.

5. We have considered the submission of the appellant and perused the

record.

6. The liquidation application was filed on 20.04.2018 the plan which was

given by the appellant was not approved by the CoC consequently, the

application for liquidation was filed. More than 7 years has elapsed after

commencement of the CIRP. We are of the view that CIRP period having come

to an and long ago. At this instance of time, we do not find any reason to

revive the CIRP and to consider the plan of the promoters. In the liquidation

by virtue of Regulation 2(B) of The Liquidation Regulation, 2016. The Scheme

of Arrangement can be given within 90 days to the Liquidator. The promoter,

if so, desire have an opportunity to submit their Scheme of Arrangement to

the Liquidator which can be considered in accordance with law. We thus are

2 of 3 Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 159 of 2026 of the view that no grounds have been made out to entertain this appeal.

Appeal is dismissed with liberty as above.

Appellant prays that he may be permitted to submit Scheme of

Arrangement' within two weeks to the Liquidator to decide the same in

accordance with law.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) harleen/MD

3 of 3 Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 159 of 2026