NCLT, NCLAT and DRAT case notes grounded in the original orders. Find the operative ruling, the reasoning that supports it and the limits that matter in practice.
39 articles · Explore all judgment analysis
Publication dates describe our articles; order dates describe the underlying decisions. Source-check dates record the verification described in each note.
13 articles · NCLAT · Page 1 of 2
Catalyst Refinery Services Private Limited v. Ganpati Global Private Limited
Catalyst Refinery v. Ganpati Global: why loan entries and TDS did not prove financial debt, what the NCLAT left open, and practical Section 7 evidence checks.
Deepak Kumar Goyal v. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India
Deepak Kumar Goyal v IBBI: consultation records and prior instructions remained mandatory, but NCLAT remanded the cancellation penalty for reconsideration.
Rajesh Harikishan Khandelwal v. Jay Ambe Industries & Anr.
Khandelwal v. Jay Ambe: how returned goods and earlier WhatsApp complaints defeated Section 9 admission, and why the commercial merits remained undecided.
Dickey Special Situation Investment Trust-DSSF Series 2 v. Mr. Manish Agarwal, Committee of Creditors of Worlds Window Exim Private Limited and Mr. Sandeep Chandna
Dickey v Manish Agarwal: NCLAT upheld plan rejection for a missing cause-of-default explanation, while correcting the valuation and assignee-entitlement reasoning.
Debashis Nanda v. Stakeholders' Consultation Committee
Debashis Nanda: NCLAT applied the saving for an already-commenced going-concern sale, treating the liquidation order rather than auction notice as decisive.
Tata Capital Limited v. Mr. Sanjay Mahajan
Tata Capital v. Sanjay Mahajan: why security and Form D did not establish timely election, with the historical 30-day rule separated from the 2026 amendment.
Prateek Jain v. Mr. Anurag Nirbhaya, M/s. Red Apple Buyers Welfare Association, SRA Society and M/s. Windsor Paradise Heights Pvt. Ltd.
Prateek Jain: NCLAT rejected this shareholder-only plan appeal and unsupported fraud allegations; homebuyers could not substitute support for their own challenge.
Affle 3i Limited v. Axis Trustee Services Limited
Affle 3i v Axis Trustee: CIRP admission remained intact, with liberty to place a supported Section 65 application before NCLT and locus left open.
Suraksha Realty Ltd. v. Amit Gupta Resolution Professional of Mahavir Roads and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
Suraksha Realty: NCLAT distinguished pending proceedings from the conviction limb of Section 29A, while examining what the CoC knew before approval.
Mr. Dinesh Keshawrao Atkare and Mr. Madan Keshawrao Atkare v. Ms. Palak Swapnil Desai
Atkare v Desai: financing records, inspections and unexplained substitution supported Section 66 contribution; a mere discrepancy alone was not the test.
Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority and New Okhla Industrial Development Authority v. Anand Sonbhadra et al.
NCLAT distinguished contingent priority for unearned increase from an unconditional charge for authority dues in the Subhkamna lease appeals.
Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. v. Deepak Kumar Garg
NCLAT dismissed Paschimanchal’s delayed appeal: internal approvals and claimed merits could not enlarge the statutory condonation window.
