Catalyst Trusteeship Limited vs Mr. Harish Taneja (Resolution ...
- CitationComp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1589 of 2026
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The reasoning in this order is brief but present. The Tribunal does not decide a contested point of law; it disposes of the appeal by reference to the statutory duty under Section 31(2)(A) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and directs the Adjudicating Authority accordingly. The ratio is: Under Section 31(2)(A) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, the Adjudicating Authority is under a statutory duty to dispose of an application for approval of a resolution plan within thirty days from the date of receipt of the resolution plan, and an Appellate Tribunal may, having regard to that mandate and despite the workload of the Tribunals, direct the Adjudicating Authority to dispose of such an application on the next listed date or within thirty days of production of a certified copy of the order, whichever is earlier.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Catalyst Trusteeship Ltd. ...Appellant
Versus
Harish Taneja Resolution Professional of BCC ...Respondents Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Present:
For Appellant : Mr. Gopal Jain, Sr. Adv. along with Mrs. Renuka Iyer, Mr. Anmol Bansal, Mr. Aman Agarwal, Mr. Atul Sharma & Mr. Aditya Vashisth.
For Respondents : Mr. Harish Taneja (in person) & Mr. Gaurav Raj Grover, for R-1.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
[Per : Mohammad Faiz Alam Khan (Oral)]
01.09.2026 I.A. No. 6091 of 2026
Having heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant. We permit the
Appellant to bring on record the certified copy of the Impugned Order within
one week from today.
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1589 of 2026
1. The instant appeal has been filed by the Appellant who's a Financial
Creditor of the Corporate Debtor against the order dated 11.08.2026 passed
by the Learned Adjudicating Authority in Company Petition No. (IB) 495 of
2023, whereby the I.A. No. 64 of 2024 filed by the RP for approval of the
Page 1 of 4 Resolution Plan under Section 31 of the Code has not been taken up for
hearing and has been adjourned to 02.09.2026.
2. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Resolution Plan
submitted by the Respondent No. 2 i.e., M/s Civitech Developers Private
Limited was approved by the CoC on 08.10.2024 with 94.58% and in this
regard, the aforesaid application was moved by the RP before the Learned
Adjudicating Authority for approval of the Plan on 07.11.2024 and thereafter
the same is pending before the Learned Adjudicating Authority and as of
now the same has been adjourned 25-26 times and despite the indulgence
of the Appellant and other parties the same has not been disposed of.
3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant has drawn our attention towards
the Sub-section (2) (A) of Section 31 of the Code, in order to show that it is
the incumbent duty of the Learned Adjudicating Authority to pass an order
under Sub-section (1) or (2) of Section 31 within a period of 30 days from
the date of receipt of the Resolution Plan therefore, it was obligatory on the
part of the Learned Adjudicating Authority to have disposed of the
application filed by the RP within 30 days, however, so far now it has been
over two years and Plan approval application is pending before the Learned
Adjudicating Authority, therefore, appropriate directions be given to Learned
Adjudicating Authority to dispose of the aforesaid application in a time
bound manner.
4. Learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 1/ RP submits that he has
also interested to get the aforesaid application disposed of at the earliest
because the same was moved by him.
Page 2 of 4
5. We have heard Learned Counsel for the Parties and perused the
record and having regard to the order, we intend to pass the issuance of
notice to the Respondent No. 2, who is the SRA, is hereby dispensed with.
6. We notice that the Resolution Plan submitted by Respondent No. 2
was approved by the CoC on 08.10.2024, and the application for the
approval of the same was moved before the Learned Adjudicating Authority
by the RP being IA No. 64 of 2024 for the approval of the same.
7. We also notice that it has been about two years, the Plan approval
application moved by the Resolution Professional is pending before the
Learned Adjudicating Authority and the Impugned Order of date 11.08.2026
show that the matter could not be taken due to paucity of time and the
same has been adjourned to 02.09.2026.
8. This Appellate Tribunal is aware of the workload on the Tribunals,
however, having regard to the mandate given under Section 31 (2) (A) has
amended up to date, a duty has been cast on the Learned Adjudicating
Authority to dispose of the application w.r.t., the approval of the Resolution
Plan within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the Resolution
Plan.
9. Thus, having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case and
the provisions contained under Section 31 (2) (A), we dispose of the instant
appeal, with the request to Learned Adjudicating Authority to dispose of the
aforesaid plan approval application filed by the Resolution Professional, if
possible on the next date on which it has been listed or within 30 days from
production of the certified copy of this order before the Learned Adjudicating
Authority, whichever is earlier.
Page 3 of 4
10. The appeal is dispose of in above manner.
[Justice Mohammad Faiz Alam Khan] Member (Judicial)
[Mr. Naresh Salecha] Member (Technical)
Sim/mr
Page 4 of 4
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free