Recall Order Cannot Cure Failure To File Claims During Liquidation: NCLT Ahmedabad

Holding that reopening a matter for fresh hearing cannot make up for a failure to follow mandatory legal procedures, the National Company Law Tribunal at Ahmedabad has dismissed an insolvency-related application filed by Pratham Reality Developers Private Limited against Stratus Foods Pvt. Ltd

The application sought payment of licence fees, occupation charges and other dues during the liquidation process.

The order was passed on January 5, 2026, by a bench of Judicial Member Shammi Khan and Technical Member Sanjeev Sharma. The tribunal said that although an earlier order had recalled the dismissal of the application and allowed it to be heard again, that recall did not amount to approval of the claims themselves.

“The recall order of 26.08.2025 enabled adjudication but did not validate claims,” the b observed.

Pratham Reality approached the tribunal during the liquidation of the corporate debtor, seeking recovery of license fees and other charges arising from the corporate debtor's occupation and use of premises belonging to Pratham Reality, along with related expenses.

The application was filed under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. An earlier order dismissing the application was partially recalled in August 2025, limited to certain prayers, following which the matter was heard afresh.

During the rehearing, the corporate debtor objected to the application, arguing that Pratham Reality had failed to lodge its claim with the liquidator as required under the Code, making the plea itself non-maintainable.

It was pointed out that the applicant had not submitted its claims in the manner prescribed under the Code and the regulations, and that Section 60(5) could not be used to sidestep those requirements.

Pratham Reality relied on the recall order to argue that the tribunal had already permitted reconsideration of its claims and that the dispute should be decided on its merits.

The tribunal rejected that argument, holding that procedural compliance could not be bypassed. It said the recall order was only an administrative step to allow a hearing and could not cure foundational defects.

“The Applicant had opportunity but failed to file proper claims,” the bench said, adding that Section 60(5) cannot be invoked to override the statutory framework governing submission and verification of claims during liquidation.

On this reasoning, the tribunal dismissed the application and directed that the proceedings be closed within seven days, without any order on costs.

Case Title: Pratham Realty Developers v. Nirav Tarkas and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LLBiz NCLT (AHM) 43

Case Number: IA/377(AHM)2021 in C.P. (I.B.) No. 03 (AHM) 2017

For Applicant: Advocates K. V. Shelat and Love Modi

For Respondent: Advocate Aadit R. Sanjanwala for Liquidator.