Delhi HC Permits RP to Convene CoC Meeting Pending NCLT Proceedings, Directs to Make Decision Subject to Tribunal Decision [Read Order]
The court directed that the decisions made would remain subject to the NCLT’s ruling on the pending application, while also permitting the CIRP to continue unless specifically restrained by the tribunal.
![Delhi HC Permits RP to Convene CoC Meeting Pending NCLT Proceedings, Directs to Make Decision Subject to Tribunal Decision [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/08/01/2072034-delhi-hc-coc-meeting-nclt-proceedings.webp "Delhi HC Permits RP to Convene CoC Meeting Pending NCLT Proceedings, Directs to Make Decision Subject to Tribunal Decision [Read Order]")
The High Court of Delhi, permits Resolution Professional (RP ) to convene 39th CoC meeting despite the petitioner’s objection citing a pending National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) application, but directed that all decisions taken in the meeting would remain subject to the tribunal’s final decision.
Jag Mohan Garg,petitioner-assessee, challenged the notice issued by the Resolution Professional for the 39th CoC meeting on 24.06.2025 to vote on the proposed resolution plan. He had already filed I.A. No. 2863/2025 before the NCLT, heard on 10.06.2025 and 12.06.2025, and listed for 02.07.2025. He argued that holding the meeting before the hearing would make his application pointless.
Tax Planning For Trusts and cooperation Societies - Click Here
The respondent counsel accepted the notice and explained that the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was time‑bound, so the meeting on 24.06.2025 was called bona fide. He said the petitioner was part of the suspended board and believed to be involved in the fraud on the corporate debtor.
He noted that the respondent had already challenged the maintainability of I.A. No. 2863/2025, which was set for hearing on 02.07.2025 before the NCLT, and clarified that there was no intent to overreach those proceedings. The meeting, he said, was called only to meet statutory timelines.
He added that if the petitioner had any objection to the meeting, the proper remedy was to approach the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ( NCLAT) instead of filing the writ petition.
3000 Illustrations, Case Studies & Examples for Ind-AS & IFRS, Click Here
The petitioner counsel stated that the petitioner genuinely believed it had no remedy to approach the NCLAT against the notice calling the meeting on 24.06.2025. He further stated that the petitioner disputed the respondent’s allegations of fraud.
Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora heard both sides and allowed the respondent to go ahead with the 24.06.2025 meeting, stating that any decisions made would depend on the outcome of I.A. No. 2863/2025 before the NCLT.
It clarified that the respondent could continue the CIRP unless the NCLT ordered otherwise. The petitioner said this clarification was acceptable.
With these directions, the Court disposed of the petition and the pending application.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
