Rupal Manish Patel (Suspended ... vs Punit Handa (Rp Of Keya Buildtech Llp) & ...

IN THE MATTER OF: Rupal Manish Patel ...Applicant (Suspended Designated Partner of Keya Buildtech LLP) Versus Punit Handa (RP of Keya Buildtech LLP) & Ors. ...Respondents

Present: For Applicant : Mr. Abhijeet Sinha, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Anirban Bhattacharya, Mr. Nipun Gautam, Mr. Akshay Matani and Mr. Rajeev Chowdhary, Advocates.

For Respondents : Mr. Siddarth Sangal, Mr. Gaurav Vashisth and Ms. Richa Mishra, Advocates for RP.

Mr. Siddharth Silwal and Ms. Shivani Sharma, Advocates for R-4 & R-5.

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

27.04.2026 : I.A. No. 3030/2026

1. This is an application filed by the appellant seeking prayers which are

as follows:

"a. Kindly stay further steps in pursuance of the Impugned Order dated 20.01.2025 passed by the Hon'ble National Company Law Tribunal at Ahmedabad in CP(IB)/247/7(AHM)/2025 till next date of hearing in Appeal i.e. 25.05.2026; b. Direct no coercive steps be taken against the suspended partners of the Corporate Debtor; c. Kindly exempt the personal appearance of the Applicant and R-2 before the Ld. NCLT Ahmedabad Bench;

Pass such other order or orders that this Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and equity."

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in proceedings by the

order passed in Section 7 application dated 20.01.2026, this appeal has been

filed, where this Court has entertained the appeal and passed an order on

25.02.2026. It is submitted that Resolution Professional (RP) has filed

application under Section 19(2) against the suspended director including the

appellant where various directions have been issued. It is submitted that

appellant has appeared through counsel before the adjudicating authority,

however, adjudicating authority has passed an order for personal appearance

on 20.04.2026 and the matter is listed today.

3. When we look into the order dated 20.04.2026 which is filed along with

the application, we do not find any specific reason for asking of personal

appearance of the appellant. Appellant is appearing through counsel. Section

19(2) application can be heard and decided on the basis of the reply of the

appellant, however the adjudicating authority is fully entitled to issue

direction for personal appearance if there are specific reasons.

4. In view of the above, we are of the view that appellant need not appear

in person on the date fixed and he should be permitted to represent through

counsel before the adjudicating authority.

I.A. No. 3030 of 2026 in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 373 of 2026 2 of 3

5. In view of the aforesaid, we dispose of the application in accepting the

Prayer (c) only.

Application is disposed of accordingly.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) himanshu/md

I.A. No. 3030 of 2026 in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 373 of 2026 3 of 3