NCLT Delhi Rejects Insolvency Transfer Application, Penalises Ex-Promoter for Concealing Key Facts
Case Overview
Case Name: Sanjeev Mahajan Vs Nimitaya Hotel Resorts Ltd.
Forum: National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi (Special Bench)
Nature of Proceeding: Transfer Application – TA(IBC)-28(PB)/2026
Underlying Matter: CP(IB) No. 1913/2019 — Indian Bank (Erstwhile Allahabad Bank) vs. Nimitaya Hotel & Resorts Limited
Background of the Dispute
The matter arose from insolvency proceedings initiated under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against Nimitaya Hotel and Resorts Ltd., the Corporate Debtor. The underlying petition, CP(IB) No. 1913/2019, was filed by Indian Bank (formerly Allahabad Bank) and had been pending before the NCLT, New Delhi.
The Transfer Application in question — TA(IBC)-28(PB)/2026 — was moved by the ex-promoter of the Corporate Debtor, seeking the transfer of CP(IB) No. 1913/2019, along with all connected interlocutory applications, from the NCLT New Delhi Special Bench to any other appropriate Bench of the Tribunal.
How the Special Bench Came to Be Constituted
To appreciate the context of the transfer request, it is essential to understand the sequence of events that led to the constitution of the Special Bench in the first place.
CP(IB) No. 1913/2019 was originally being adjudicated by Court-V, NCLT, New Delhi. On 09.12.2025, both Members constituting that Bench recused themselves from hearing the matter. Following this recusal, the then President of the NCLT issued an administrative order dated 06.01.2026 constituting a Special Bench specifically to hear and adjudicate the said proceedings.
Contrary to the applicant's assertion that no effective hearing had taken place before the Special Bench, a perusal of the record revealed that the Special Bench had already conducted hearings and had passed substantive orders, including those dated 15.04.2026 and 20.05.2026.
The Applicant's Contentions
The ex-promoter, through his Senior Counsel, argued that:
- Although the matter had been assigned to the Special Bench, no effective hearing had occurred and the proceedings had suffered unnecessary delay.
- Given the lack of progress, it was submitted that the interests of justice demanded that the matter be transferred to a Regular Bench of the NCLT so that adjudication could proceed without further impediment.
Opposition by Respondents
Counsel appearing for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 raised strong objections to the maintainability and conduct of the transfer application, highlighting critical facts that had been deliberately or negligently withheld by the applicant: