Krishan Mohan Mehndiratta And Ors vs Manoj Kumar Anand And Ors

Krishan Mohan Mehndiratta & Ors. ...Appellant

Versus

Manoj Kumar Anand & Ors. ...Respondents Present: For Appellant : Mr. Udita Singh, Mr. Anjit Dwivedi , Advocates For Respondents : Mr. S.K. Sharma, Mr. Dyutz Ghai, Advocates for RP/ R-1 Mr. Ankur Mittal, Ms. Sabhya Jain, Advocates for R-2

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode) 02.09.2025: Heard Learned counsel for the appellant. Learned counsel

appearing for the RP as well as the counsel appearing for the R1.

2. This application has been filed against the order dated 28.07.2025

passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi, Principal Bench

in five connected cases relating to personal guarantor filed by State Bank of

India. Adjudicating Authority after hearing the parties has issued following

directions in para 5 and 6;

5. The Personal Guarantor should provide the repayment plan without fail on before 04.08.2025 not later than 05:00 PM. If the repayment plan is not given in the proper form and within the time as mentioned above the RP can close the issue and consider it as no plan and proceed further as per law.

6. If there is a delay of any kind by the PG, it is confirmed that there is no plan. However, if the plan is complete in all respects, then it can be considered by a Meeting of Creditors (MOC) on its own merits in an appropriate manner for voting

1|3 within a period of three days thereafter. Consequently, the RP shall submit his report on or before 11.08.2025.

3. When the appeal was taken for consideration on 12.08.2025 following

order was passed:

"Learned counsel for the RP is allowed to bring the minutes of the meeting held on 08.08.2025 in pursuance of the order of the adjudicating authority dated 28.07.2025, which may be done on or before the next date fixed and RP is also directed to place the report submitted in compliance of the order of the adjudicating authority dated 28.07.2025, which may also be done on or before the next date fixed. As prayed, list this appeal on 22nd August, 2025."

4. RP has filed a status report dated 20.08.2025 where RP has stated

that Repayment plan was submitted within time as allowed by the

Adjudicating Authority and according to the RP meeting of creditors was

also called but voting could not take place. State Bank of India has taken

objection that plan was not compliant and further the State Bank of India

commented that they require 15 days' time in event the complainet plan is

received.

5. Learned counsel for the RP in his report has also now made following

prayer;

Prayer

"In view of the facts and circumstances narrated hereinabove, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Adjudicating Authority may be pleased to:

a) Grant such further time as deemed appropriate to the creditors and the Personal Guarantor for deliberation, modification, and finalisation of a compliant repayment plan in accordance with the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and the applicable Regulations;

2|3

b) Permit the Resolution Professional to facilitate further discussions between the creditors and the Personal Guarantor for the purpose of revising and resubmitting the repayment plan, within such timelines as this Hon'ble Authority may prescribe;

c) To pass such orders under Section 114 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, as this Hon'ble Adjudicating Authority may deem just, fit, and appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

d) Pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Adjudicating Authority may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice, equity, and fair play."

6. The order of the Adjudicating Authority was as an indulgence to the

personal guarantee to submit the plan which although submitted within

time allowed but as per the bank no compliant plan. Appellant however also

had submitted that appellant is still wanting to submit a further compliant

revised plan within one week from today, in consultation with the RP. RP

shall convene the meeting of the creditor and complete the process of voting

within two weeks, thereafter.

In view of the facts of the present case no further directions are

required and the appeal is disposed of with the aforesaid.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)

tushar/nn

3|3