Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Pratul Kumar Singh vs India Sme Arc Ltd. & Ors

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal25 September 2026

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

A bankruptcy trustee whose removal is sought on the basis of an adverse assessment of his conduct must be given an opportunity to be heard and to explain that conduct before the adjudicating authority acts against him; an order removing him and appointing a replacement, passed without affording that opportunity, is liable to be set aside and the matter remitted for fresh hearing in accordance with law.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNALPRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1825 of 2026 IN THE MATTER OF: Pratul Kumar Singh ...Appellant(s)

Versus India SME ARC Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondent(s)

Present: For Appellant : Mr. Ramji Srinivasan, Mr. Samar Bansal, Sr. Advocates with Mr. Rahul Kukreja, Mr. Jatin Shrivastava, Mr. Aryansh Tripathi, Advocates

For Respondents : Mr. Vaibhav Gaggar, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Megha Gupta, Ms. Lavanita Chityala, Advocates for R-1

Mr. Sunil Fernandis, Sr. Advocate for ASREC

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

25.09.2026 This appeal is filed against an impugned order dated

10/09/2026, whereby in I.A. No. 3923 of 2026 in C.P. (IB) No.

593/MB/2025, the Appellant has been removed as a Bankruptcy Trustee

and instead Mr. Umesh Balaram Sonkar has been appointed.

2. It is the submission of the Ld. Sr. Counsel for appellant the said order

was passed without hearing the appellant and it cast an aspersion upon his

conduct as a Bankruptcy Trustee, as such notice was necessarily to be

issued prior to acting against him.

3. Further, it is submitted the procedure as written in Section 145 of the

Code has not been followed. Ld. Sr. Counsel, Mr. Vaibhav Gaggar appears

from the side of the Respondent and argues otherwise.

4. As is apparent from the record no opportunity was afforded to the

appellant to explain his conduct, it shall be appropriate if the order dated

10/09/2026 is set aside and the Parties be heard afresh by the Ld. NCLT on

I.A. No. 3923/ 2026 in a time bound manner and upon following the

procedure as per law.

5. The parties to appear before the Ld. NCLT on monday, i.e.,

28/09/2026. All rights and contentions of both the parties shall remain

intact and parties shall cooperate in disposal of the application viz. I.A. No.

3923 of 2026.

In view of the above, appeal is disposed of.

All pending applications, viz. I.A. No. 6930, 6931 & 6932 of 2026 are

also disposed of.

[Justice Yogesh Khanna] The Officiating Chairperson

[Ajai Das Mehrotra] Member (Technical) Prerana/md

2 of 2

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