― Advertisement ―

HomeAvj Heightss Apartment Owners ... vs Iifl Finance Limited on 29 April,...

Avj Heightss Apartment Owners … vs Iifl Finance Limited on 29 April, 2026

ADVERTISEMENT

Supreme Court – Daily Orders

Avj Heightss Apartment Owners … vs Iifl Finance Limited on 29 April, 2026

                                                               CIVIL APPEAL   NOS.   3811/2023




     ITEM NO.301                          COURT NO.7                    SECTION XVII-B
     (PART HEARD)

                               S U P R E M E C O U R T O F        I N D I A
                                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

                                   CIVIL APPEAL    NOS.    3811/2023

     AVJ HEIGHTSS APARTMENT             OWNERS ASSOCIATION              APPELLANT(S)

                                                  VERSUS

     IIFL FINANCE LIMITED & ANR.                                        RESPONDENT(S)

     IA No. 105738/2023 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
     IA No. 105737/2023 - STAY APPLICATION

     WITH

     C.A. NO. 4628/2026 (XVII-B)
     IA No. 122548/2023 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
     JUDGMENT

IA No. 122547/2023 – PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES
IA No. 122544/2023 – PERMISSION TO FILE APPEAL
IA No. 122549/2023 – STAY APPLICATION

Date : 29-04-2026 These matters were called on for hearing today.

SPONSORED

CORAM :

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN

Amicus Curiae : Mr. Navin Pahwa, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Gopal Jain, Sr. Adv.

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sanjay Singh, Adv.

Mr. Umang Shankar, AOR
Mr. Shalender Singh Negi, Adv.
Mrs. Neha Shankar Srivastava, Adv.

Mr. Zeeshan Diwan, AOR
Signature Not Verified Mr. Krishna Datta Multani, Adv.
Digitally signed by
POOJA SHARMA
Mr. Harsha, Adv.

Date: 2026.04.30
20:21:32 IST
Reason:

1
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3811/2023

For Respondent(s) :

Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Nakul Dewan, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Angad Varma, Adv.

Mr. Nikhil Mehndiratta, Adv.
Mr. Toyesh Tewari, Adv.
Mr. Agastya Sen, Adv.

Ms. Nidhisha Choksi, Adv.
Mr. Satendra, Adv.

For M/S. Dua Associates

Mr. Anand Padmanabhan, Sr.Adv.
Ms. Pallavi Pratap, AOR
Ms. Anupriya Dixit, Adv.

Mr. Deepak Khosla, Adv.
Mr. Pranav Sachdeva, AOR
Mr. P Rohit Ram, Adv.

Ms. Mishra Divya Santosh, Adv.
Mr. Sanyam Jain, Adv.

Ms. Khushboo Singhal, Adv.

Ms. Mani Gupta, Adv.

Mr. Harsh Parashar, AOR
Ms. Sonali Jain, Adv.

Mr. Udhav Mittal, Adv.

Mr. Namit Saxena, AOR

Mr. Madhav Singhal, Adv.
Mr. Saurav Roy, Adv.

Ms. Prerna Dhal, Adv.

Ms. Madhulika Upadhyay, AOR

UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following
O R D E R

1. By our order dated 16.04.2026, we took a serious

notice of gross delay occurring in the approval of the

Resolution Plan pending before the various Benches of

the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). In such

circumstances, we thought it fit to call for some

2
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3811/2023

relevant information, more particularly, the number of

applications pending for approval of Resolution Plans;

since how long all such applications are pending; and

the reasons for delay in adjudication of the approval

applications. We had requested all the learned counsel

appearing for the parties to provide us with the

necessary information/data as regards the questions

raised above. We had also requested the Registrar,

NCLT, Principal Bench, New Delhi, to provide us with a

report answering our queries. The Insolvency and

Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) was also ordered to

be impleaded as party respondent in the appeals before

us. In the last, we requested Mr. Gopal Jain and

Mr. Navin Pahwa, learned Senior Counsel to assist us

as an Amicus.

2. Today, when the matter was taken up for further

hearing, we have been provided with the relevant

information/data. The picture highlighted by one and

all before us is extremely green and dismal. As per

the report forwarded by the Registrar of the NCLT,

Principal Bench, there are 363 applications awaiting

approval. The delay as sought to be explained ranges

from 48 days to 738 days. In some cases, the delay is

up to four years. The reasons which have been

assigned by and large are lack of adequate

3
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3811/2023

infrastructure, the lack of infrastructure resulting

in half day sittings of the Benches, more

particularly, due to interchange of combinations and

large pendency of objections to the Resolution Plan

filed by various parties/stakeholders. We take notice

of the fact that in very few cases there are some

interim orders passed by Higher Courts.

3. We have also heard Ms. Mani Gupta, learned

counsel appearing for the Resolution Professional in

the present matter. She has also provided us very

useful information. The first thing she has

highlighted is the severe shortage of Judicial and

technical members. The statutory sanctioned strength

of NCLT across the country is 63 members comprising

one President and 31 Judicial and Technical Members

each. However, we are thoroughly disappointed to state

that, out of the sanctioned strength of 63, presently

only 28 Judicial Members and 26 Technical Members are

posted across various NCLT Benches as on 28.04.2026.

There is acute shortage of ten members, which is

severally affecting the efficiency of the functioning

of NCLT Benches in disposal of cases within the time

bound manner.

4. The second aspect highlighted is with respect to

non-allocation of adequate infrastructure. Some

4
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3811/2023

instances have been highlighted why the functioning

had to be suspended indefinitely etc.

5. Thereafter, the learned counsel highlighted the

inadequacy in technology and administrative support;

and in the last, the misuse of Section 60(5) of the

IBC was highlighted.

6. In due deference to our request, Mr. Navin Pahwa,

learned Amicus has provided us very useful

information. The note provided by Mr. Pahwa talks

about: i) Time lines of CIRP, ii) Status of Resolution

Plans, iii) General reasons for delay in decisions on

on Resolution Plans, iv) Qualification and Selection

of the Members of the Tribunal, v) Appointment of

staff of Tribunal.

7. What has been brought to our notice by Mr. Pahwa

is something very disturbing. It was pointed out to

us that even the post of Registrar, barring few

Benches, is filled up on contractual basis. This is

something unheard of. It was also brought to our

notice that none of the Benches of the NCLT have full

time employees. Advertisements are published by the

NCLT inviting applications for engagement to the post

of Deputy Registrar purely on contractual assignment

in different Benches of NCLT. All other staff

including the Secretary, Court Master, Stenographers,

5
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3811/2023

legal assistants are appointed on contractual basis by

office of the President, NCLT. The services of all

these persons contractually appointed are purely

temporary and are intermittently terminated. There

are issues about non-payment of salary and other

allowances. Mr. Pahwa has cited one instance of a

news report dated 14.01.2025 that the entire staff of

NCLT Mumbai were on strike as salaries were not paid

on time. He also highlighted the importance of

providing each member with a research associate/legal

assistant.

8. Some of the suggestions put by Mr. Pahwa are as

under:

“1. The MCA, UOI be directed to recruit
permanent staff for all the Benches of Tribunal
including, in particular, the Court Officer,
Stenographers and Research Associates/Legal
Assistants.

2. Court Rooms at least equal to the number of
Benches with all infrastructure be made
available within defined timelines.

3. The vacancies be filled-up in defined
timelines.

4. The Benches may be encouraged/persuaded to
function during the entire Court hours.

5. Regular workshops and colloquiums be held
in defined time lines in consultation with
President/IBBI.

6
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3811/2023

6. It is important that before deciding the
Plan Approval Application, the NCLT should
decide:-

a) issues of eligibility u/s 29A, if
any;

b) Challenge to the admission/
rejection of claims;

c) Challenge to the constitution of
CoC;

expeditiously.

7. In Plan Approval Applications, as a matter
of General Guidelines and instructions,
following parties may be added at the initial
stage itself:

       a)     the CoC through lead member;
       b)     suspended management;
       c)     Income Tax Department in the
       event the Plan has a provision to

carry forward of business losses as
per Sec.79 of the Income Tax Act,
1961

d) Regulators such as RERA, NOIDA
Authority, etc. in case of plans
concerning Home Buyers;

e) Plan concerning telecom/ spectrum
cases, the DoT may be made party.

8. The disposal of avoidance applications may
not be linked to disposal of Application for
Approval of Resolution Plan. Section 26 of the
IBC specifically states that filing of an
avoidance application under Section 25(2)(j)
shall not affect the proceedings of CIRP.
Regulation 37(a) already stipulates a provision
to be made in the plan for transfer of all/
part of the assets of Corporate Debtor from
such avoidance applications.

7
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3811/2023

9. As per the mandate of Section 31(2A)
(although yet to be notified), the Plan
Approval Application be disposed within a
period of 30 days. For achieving this, after
initial period of completion of proceedings,
such applications be heard on day-to-day basis
in the post lunch period.”

9. Mr. Gopal Jain, learned Amicus, has also assisted

us on the issues highlighted above. Mr. Jain

submitted that in the recent amendment undertaken,

Section 31(2A) has been inserted. By this amendment,

now the application seeking approval has to be

disposed of within a period of thirty days. Of

course, this amendment has not yet come into force.

But the day it comes into force, we have our own

doubts whether true effect could be given to this

particular amendment in light of the deficiencies

which we have highlighted above.

10. National Company Law Tribunals exercise vast

jurisdiction, both under the Companies Act, 2013 and

under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC,

2016). In the statement of objects and reasons of the

IBC, 2016, the following has been set out:

“2. The objective of the Insolvency and
Bankruptcy Code, 2015, is to consolidate
and amend the laws relating to
reorganization and insolvency resolution
of corporate persons, partnership firms

8
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3811/2023

and individuals in a time bound manner for
maximization of value of assets of such
persons, to promote entrepreneurship,
availability of credit and balance the
interests of all the stakeholders
including alteration in the priority of
payment of government dues and to
establish an Insolvency and Bankruptcy
Fund, and matters connected therewith or
incidental thereto. An effective legal
framework for timely resolution of
insolvency and bankruptcy would support
development of credit markets and
encourage entrepreneurship. It would also
Improve Ease of Doing Business, and
facilitate more investments leading to
higher economic growth and development.”
(Emphasis supplied)

11. In the state of affairs that are presently

prevailing, the objective of time bound resolution is

impossible to achieve. IBC, 2016, is a crucial piece

of economic legislation, which impacts the credit

system as well as the economy itself in general in a

very big way. The very purpose of introducing the

IBC, 2016 was on account of the fact that the system

that was provided earlier under the Sick Industrial

Companies Act, 1985, turned out to be a total failure.

From a promoter driven resolution under the SICA on

the advise of expert Committees, (reports like the

T.K. Viswanathann Committee and the Injeti Srinivas

Committee), a shift was brought about to make

Insolvency Resolution a creditor driven process.

Thousands of Crores of Rupees are at stake. The whole

9
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3811/2023

idea was to sustain companies which were going down

the drain on account of various factors and keep

companies afloat as a going concern, so that the

economy is kept on its wheels and the labour is

protected.

12. We take suo moto cognizance of the aforesaid in

larger public interest. We believe that all the issues

as aforesaid need to be addressed on a war footing,

otherwise the very purpose and object of enacting the

IBC would stand frustrated.

13. As we have taken suo moto cognizance, let the

matter be now placed before Hon’ble the Chief Justice

of India for further orders. The Registry shall, at

the earliest, place this order before Hon’ble the

Chief Justice of India.

14. Insofar as the merits of the appeals are

concerned, we shall await for the appropriate orders

that Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India may pass.

15. We are grateful to all the learned counsel

appearing in this litigation for assisting us by

providing the relevant information, more particularly,

Mr. Navin Pahwa and Mr. Gopal Jain, learned Senior

Counsel, whom we have appointed as Amicus Curiae to

assist us.

16. We also place on record our gratitude for Ms. Mani

10
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3811/2023

Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the Resolution

Professional, for producing a very exhaustive report

on all the relevant aspects of the matter.

(POOJA SHARMA)                          (POOJA SHARMA)
   AR-CUM-PS                          COURT MASTER (NSH)




                          11



Source link