The First Appellate Authority of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) disposed of an RTI appeal filed by an individual seeking access to records and compliance reports related to the insolvency resolution process of Dewan Housing Finance Ltd. (DHFL). The appellant contended that the exemption under Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act, protecting commercial information, was incorrectly invoked since DHFL was under Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) and no longer had a competitive market position. He further argued public interest in disclosure due to a security interest registered against his property during the moratorium. The IBBI clarified that while the RTI Act allows access to information held by public authorities, exemptions apply. The CPIO stated that the specific filings requested were not maintained in a segregated manner. The appellate authority accordingly modified the CPIO’s reply to reflect this limitation and disposed of the appeal without ordering full disclosure.
BEFORE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY BOARD OF INDIA
7th Floor, Mayur Bhawan, Shankar Market,
Connaught Circus, New Delhi -110001
Dated: 2nd December 2025
Order under section 19 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) in respect of RTI Appeal Registration No. ISBBI/A/E/25/000123
IN THE MATTER OF
Senthil Kumar P … Appellant
Vs.
Central Public Information Officer …Respondent
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India
7th Floor, Mayur Bhawan, Shankar Market,
Connaught Circus, New Delhi -110001
1. The Appellant has filed the present Appeal dated 24th October 2025, challenging the communication of the Respondent, filed under the Right to Information Act (RTI Act).
2. The Appellant had sought several records/documents pertaining to the insolvency resolution process of Dewan Housing Finance Ltd. (DHFL). The CPIO Respondent has inter-alia stated that the compliance reports or filings, as submitted by the Administrator to the IBBI, are confidential commercial documents and eligible for exemption under Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act. Aggrieved, the Appellant filed the present Appeal by contending that the exemption was wrongly invoked because DHFL is under CIRP and therefore, has no competitive position in the market to protect. The Appellant further argued that a larger public interest warrants disclosure, as a security interest was registered against his property during the moratorium, and any action taken by the RP affecting his property rights would violate Article 300A of the Constitution of India.
3. I have carefully examined the applications, the responses of the Respondent and the Appeals and find that the matter can be decided based on the material available on record. In terms of section 2(f) of the RTI Act ‘information’ means “any material in any form, including records, documents, memos e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force.” While the “right to information” flows from section 3 of the RTI Act, it is subject to other provisions of the Act. Section 2(j) of the RTI Act defines the “right to information” in term of information accessible under the Act which is held by or is under the control of a public authority. Thus, if the public authority holds any information in the form of data, statistics, abstracts, an applicant can have access to the same under the RTI Act subject to exemptions under section 8.
4. In respect of the impugned Appeal, this Authority had sought further inputs from the Respondent CPIO concerning the information requested by the Appellant. The CPIO, in response, submitted that the filings or compliance reports furnished by the Resolution Professional/Administrator to the IBBI are not maintained in such segregated or specifically categorised manner as has been sought by the Appellant. In view of the aforesaid clarification, the reply of the CPIO stands modified to this limited extent.
5. The Appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.
Sd/-
(Kulwant Singh)
First Appellate Authority
Copy to:
1. Appellant, Senthil Kumar P
2. CPIO, The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India, 7th Floor, Mayur Bhawan, Shankar
Market, Connaught Circus, New Delhi -110001.
