Mr. Prakash Jain & Ors. & Ors vs Mr. Sunil Kumar Agarwal

IN THE MATTER OF: Prakash Jain & Ors. ...Appellants Versus Sunil Kumar Agarwal ...Respondent

Present: For Appellants : Present appearance not marked.

For Respondent : Mr. Sumit Kansal, Ms. Monika Madan, Mr. Mahesh Rathore, Mr. Uttam Kumar and Mr. Tanishq Verma, Advocates.

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

09.07.2026 : This appeal is against an impugned order dated

16.02.2026, whereby the applications filed under Section 60(5) of the

Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 read with Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules,

2016 was dismissed.

2. In the application, the appellant sought stay of the operation and

implementation of the auction sale of the property known as "New

Ramakada Market Bhaduat Association" having addressed at Ramakada

Market, Pankornaka, Ahmedabad-380001 situated at

02684/6.8.91112/19+21. Further, he is aggrieved of the valuation of the

subject property.

3. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant the sale

transaction pertains to the said property be declared as null and void as he

is a tenant in such certain property for the last several years and his tenancy is in perpetuity. Admittedly, the property in question is sold by the

bankruptcy trustee for the sum of Rs.1,81,00,000/-, which according to the

appellant is below the prevailing market price.

4. We have perused the order of the Ld. NCLT which shows there is

nothing on record to demonstrate the locus standi of the applicant to

challenge the auction process as the only submission made by him is he is a

tenant and in occupancy of the subject property under a lease, hence has no

right to question the auction of the property or the bankruptcy of its owner.

5. We have gone through the entire order and we see no reason to

interfere with the same considering the appellant is merely a lessee in the

subject property and not the owner thereof. The appeal devoid of merits as

the appellant being a tenant has no right to challenge auction or its

valuation and if he intends to protect his tenancy, may seek appropriate

remedy.

6. Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed. Pending applications are

also disposed of.

[Justice Yogesh Khanna] Officiating Chairperson

[Indevar Pandey] Member (Technical) himanshu/md

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 786 of 2026 & I.A. No. 3062 of 2026 2 of 2