Nehru Place Hotels And Real Estates ... vs Sanjeev Mahajan & Ors & Ors

Contempt Case (AT) No. 12 & 13 of 2026 in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1715 & 1716 of 2023 IN THE MATTER OF: Nehru Place Hotels and Real Estates Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant(s)

Versus Sanjeev Mahajan & Ors. ...Respondent(s)

Present: For Appellant : Mr. Sumesh Dhawan, Mr. Ajay Kumar, Mr. Pankaj Sethi, Ms. Stuti Vatsa, Mr. Vijayank Goel, Advocates

For Respondents : Mr. Manoranjan Nayak, Mr. Nakul Mohta, Mr. Zain A. Khan, Mr. Kumar Anurag Singh, Mr. Abran Khan, Advocates for R1 Mr. Rajesh Kumar Gautam, Mr. Anant Gautam, Ms. Rishi Chauhan, Mr. Azal Akram, Ms. Likivi K. Jakhalu, Advocates for R2 to R-10 Mr. Abhishek Anand, Mr. Navneet Gupta, Advocates for RP

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

20.05.2026 These Contempt Applications have been filed alleging

contempt of the orders passed by this Tribunal in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No

1715 & 1716 of 2023 and Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No 1440 of 2024.

2. Ld. Counsel for Appellant has referred to the order dated 08/01/2024

and subsequent order dated 20/08/2024. By the first order passed in the

Appeal dated 08/01/2024, in Paragraph 27 we observed as follows :

"27. In view of the aforesaid discussion and our conclusions, we are of the view that the Adjudicating Authority committed error in giving an opportunity to Respondent No. 1 to arrive at acceptable settlement. Thus, following observations in the Order are deleted from the order "Since, the matter is an old one, last opportunity is granted, so that any acceptable settlement can be arrived. If not settlement arises before the next date of hearing, the Resolution Plan will be heard on merits." We are of the view that application for approval of the Resolution Plan which has already been filed and pending consideration, the Adjudicating Authority ought to have considered and decided the Application for approval of the plan. It was also open for the Adjudicating Authority to consider I.A. No. 2594 of 2023 and to take a final decision. The plan having been approved on 08th January, 2023 and application is pending for about last one year before the Adjudicating Authority, we are of the view that Adjudicating Authority may proceed expeditiously to decide application filed by the Resolution Professional for approval of the plan i.e. I.A. No. 987 of 2023. It would be also open for the Adjudicating Authority to consider and decide I.A. No. 2594 of 2023 filed by Respondent No.

1. 11th January, 2024 is also fixed in the matter, we request the Adjudicating Authority to proceed to decide the aforesaid application on the date fixed or as early as possible.

The Appeal is disposed of, accordingly."

3. Subsequent order was an order passed in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No.

1440 of 2024, where the Appeal filed by the promoters of the Corporate

Debtor was dismissed on 20/08/2024. In both the orders, we do not find any

directions of which Appellant can complain of violation by the Respondent.

4. Contempt proceedings can be initiated only when there is a deliberate

violation of a direction issued by the Court. In the present Application, we do

not find any such direction which can be said to have been violated.

Ld. Counsel for the Applicant contends that various actions are being taken

by the promoters, and the Committee of Creditors, which are not in

accordance with the provisions of law and directions issued by the judgement.

2 of 3

5. In the present contempt proceedings, we are only concerned with the

allegation of contempt made by the Applicant. When there is no contempt

made out, we are not inclined to entertain the Application. As far as the other

actions are concerned, it is always open for the Appellant to take such

remedies as available in law.

6. With these observations, we dismiss the Contempt Applications.

7. The judgement passed by this Tribunal noted above are clear and is

always for the Parties to refer and rely the judgement.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Indevar Pandey] Member (Technical) Prerana/md

3 of 3