Application Filed u/s 10 by CD with Fraudulent Intent was Rightly Rejected by NCLT

  • Blog|News|Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code|
  • 3 Min Read
  • By Taxmann
  • |
  • Last Updated on 11 April, 2023

Corporate debtor's application u/s 10

Case Details: Wave Megacity Centre (P.) Ltd. v. Rakesh Taneja - [2023] 148 402 (NCLAT-New Delhi)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

    • Justice Ashok Bhushan, Chairperson & Barun Mitra, Technical Member
    • A.N.S. Nadkarni, Sr. Adv., Hardeep SachdevaSameer SodhiAbhyudai SinghKanika SinghalMukundDhruv WadhwaMs Deepty AryaS.S. RebelloMs Arzu PaulMs Manisha GuptaRahul SinghNishant ShokeenMs Sumita SinghAltamash Rashid, Advs for the Appellant.
    • Sanjiv Sen, Sr. Adv. Sourav RoyKaushal SharmaPrabudh SinghRatnesh SharmaRahul Raman, Advs. M.L Lahoty, Sr. Adv. Dania NayyarBhanu TejaswiKrishna Mohan K.Rakesh Taneja, Advs. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, a lease deed was signed between NOIDA Authority and the appellant (i.e. corporate debtor) for a period of 90 years and, the appellant paid 10% of the total consideration amount. The appellant launched residential and commercial project, the possession of which was to be handed over to homebuyers before 2016 and for which the appellant had taken 90% consideration from the majority of homebuyers.

However, the appellant neither completed construction nor handed over possession and also stopped constructing the project altogether from 2017 onwards. Thereafter, the Noida Authority called upon the appellant to make the due payment, including balance premium and ground rent. Meanwhile, the appellant filed an application u/s 10 of the IBC to initiate the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) against itself.

In response, the respondent along with others who were allottees of residential/commercial units in the project filed an application u/s 65 before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), on the ground that the appellant had filed the section 10 application fraudulently with malicious intent for a purpose other than for the resolution of insolvency.

The NCLT by an impugned order allowed the application filed under section 65 and dismissed the application filed by the appellant u/s 10 of the IBC. Then, an appeal was made to the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) against the order passed by the NCLT.


The NCLAT noted that the directors of the corporate debtor, before filing the section 10 application had resigned and transposed as financial creditors in the said application.

The NCLAT, further observed that the appellant had initiated the CIRP with a fraudulent or malicious intent for a purpose other than for the resolution of insolvency and which would be contrary to the statutory scheme under section 65 of the IBC.

The NCLAT held that the rejection of the section 10 application by the NCLT was consequent and inescapable, and therefore, the NCLT had not committed any error in allowing the application filed u/s 65 and rejecting the section 10 application.

The NCLAT, further held that since section 10A shall not apply to any default committed before 25-3-2020 and the default committed by the appellant was much before 25-3-2020, the application filed by the appellant u/s 10 of the IBC was not barred by limitation in terms of section 10A of the IBC. Accordingly, the appeal was to be dismissed.

List of Cases Reviewed

    • Wave Megacity Centre (P.) Ltd., In re [2023] 148 401 (NCLT – New Delhi) (para 21) affirmed [See Annex].
    • Ramjas foundation v. Union of India [2010] 14 SCC 38 (para 15) followed.

List of Cases Referred to

Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Everything on Tax and Corporate Laws of India

To subscribe to our weekly newsletter please log in/register on

Author: Taxmann

Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.

The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:

  • The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
  • All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
  • Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
  • Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
  • All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
  • The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
  • Font and size that's easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied