Kashyap Organics Private Limited vs Respondent

IN THE MATTER OF: Kashyap Organics Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant Versus --- ...Respondent

Present: For Appellant : Mr. Yashoaj Guglani and Mr. Narender Thakur, Advocates.

For Respondent : None.

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

25.11.2025 : Heard counsel for the appellant.

2. This appal has been filed against an order dated 11.07.2025 passed by

the adjudicating authority rejecting the restoration application 58/ND/2025.

3. The appellant has filed a Section 10 application being C.P. (IB) No.

333/ND/2023 in which application on 08.05.2025, adjudicating authority

directed to take steps for notice to the creditors by paper publication in two

leading newspapers one in English language and another one in Vernacular

language.

4. Subsequent to the order 08.05.2025, application was listed on

02.06.2025, on which date, adjudicating authority observing that till

02.06.2025 the order dated 08.05.2025 has not been complied with,

dismissed for non-prosecution and for non-compliance.

5. The appellant filed an application to recall the order dated 02.06.2025.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the order dated 08.05.2025

was complied with and publication in the two newspapers have already taken

place on 01.06.2025 but affidavit of compliance could not be placed before

the adjudicating authority, hence observation of the adjudicating authority

that appellant was not interested in pursuing the matter was not correct.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant has referred to the restoration

application and has referred to paragraph 3, where following has been

pleaded:

"3. That the Applicant has duly complied with the directions contained in the Order dated 08.05.2025 passed by this Hon'ble Tribunal by effecting publication in the prescribed manner. It is respectfully submitted that although there was a nominal delay in carrying out the said compliance, the same was neither willful nor deliberate, and the Applicant has ensured that the publication was ultimately completed in strict adherence to the procedural requirements. Copy of Newspaper publications pursuant to Order dated 08.05.2025 passed by Hon 'ble Tribunal are attached herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-II."

7. Along with the application for restoration, the appellant has annexed

the paper publication, publishing the notices in English newspaper on

01.06.2025 and in Vernacular newspaper on 01.06.2025 itself.

8. We thus are of the view that although it is true that affidavit was not

filed nor it was brought into the notice of the Court on 02.06.2025 that

publication has been made, hence the adjudicating authority has rejected the

application for non-prosecution.

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1747 of 2025 & I.A. No. 6775 of 2025 2 of 3

9. After having heard learned counsel for the appellant and perusing the

materials on the record, we are of the view that publication had been made

on 01.06.2025 which is brought on the record along with the restoration

application, adjudicating authority ought to have given opportunity to the

appellant to prosecute the application. In the order rejecting the restoration

application, adjudicating authority has not adverted to the materials brought

into the restoration application.

10. We thus are of the view that appellant has made out the case for

allowing the restoration application 58/ND/2025 and revive the Section 10

application to its original number.

In result, the appeal is allowed, the order dated 11.07.2025 is set aside.

The restoration application 58/ND/2025 is allowed and C.P. (IB) No.

333/ND/2023 is revived to its original number. We, however, make it clear

that we have not entered into the merits of the application and it is for the

adjudicating authority to decide it in accordance with law.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) himanshu/md

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1747 of 2025 & I.A. No. 6775 of 2025 3 of 3