Pulkit Gupta Vs Keshav Khaneja (NCLAT Delhi)
Summary: The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) Delhi dealt with two appeals filed by the Appellant, Pulkit Gupta, challenging parts of an order dated 13.06.2025 passed by the Adjudicating Authority in CP (IB) No. 195/AHM/2025 and CP (IB) No. 199/AHM/2025. The Adjudicating Authority had admitted Section 7 applications filed by the Financial Creditor but declined to appoint the Appellant as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). The Appellant was aggrieved not by the admission of the insolvency petitions but by certain adverse observations made against him in the order.
Counsel for the Appellant clarified that he was not seeking to be appointed as the IRP in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) of the Corporate Debtors but only sought removal of remarks that could harm his professional standing. It was noted that objections were raised by the Corporate Debtors against his appointment, but the Appellant was not given an opportunity to respond to those objections.
The NCLAT held that since the Appellant did not wish to pursue appointment as IRP, any adverse remarks made in the Adjudicating Authority’s order should not be treated as final or prejudicial. The Tribunal clarified that such observations should not be considered as findings on the Appellant’s character or conduct. Consequently, the appeals were disposed of without interfering with the main order admitting the insolvency petitions.
