National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
Mr. Mopidevi Babu Rao vs Mr. Rajesh Chillale Rp For M/S. ... on 5 December, 2025
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
AT CHENNAI
(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)
Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 533/2025
(IA Nos. 1497, 1498, 1499 & 1500/2025)
In the matter of :
1. Mr. Ravi Ramesh Babu,
S/o. Koteswara Rao,
A/a. 46 years, Occ: Cultivation,
R/o. D.No. 5-127, Ravivaripalem, Mopidevi,
Mopidevi Mandal, Krishna Distrct - 521125.
2. Mr. Mopidevi Babu Rao,
S/o. Venkateswarulu,
A/a. 50 years, Occ: Business,
R/o. D.No. 2-228, Mopidevi,
Mopidevi Mandal, Krishna Distrct-521125.
Both represented by their GPA Holder,
Kantamneni Shiva Shankar,
S/o. Venkateshwara Rao, A/a. 61 years,
R/o. Ravivaripalem, Mopidevi, Mopidevi Mandal,
Krishna District - 521125. .... Appellants
V
1. Mr. Rajesh Chillale
Former Resolution Professional
Chairman, Monitoring Committee for
M/s. Bharatiya Vaidhya Vidhan Limited,
Office at: B-713, Western Plaza, OU Colony,
HS Darga, Manikonda,
Hyderabad, Telangana - 500008.
2. M/s. Bharatiya Vaidhya Vidhan Limited ("Corporate Debtor")
Regd. Office at W-24/1820/86, Military Colony,
Dargah Mitta, Nellor, A.P - 524003
3. Monitoring Committee for,
M/s. Bharatiya Vaidhya Vidhan Limited,
(IN SUCCESSION, Vide Order Dt. 30.01.2025 in
IA(IBC)/376/2023 in CP (IB) 100/7/AMR/2022)
Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) Nos. 533, 534 & 544 / 2025 Page 1 of 13
Rep. by its Chairman Mr. Rajesh Chillale
Office at: B-713, Western Plaza, OU Colony,
HS Darga, Manikonda,
Hyderabad, Telangana - 500008.
4. M/s Devi Sea Foods Limited
('Successful Resolution Applicant' or 'SRA')
(IN SUCCESSION, Vide Order Dt. 30.01.2025 in
IA(IBC)/376/2023 in CP (IB) 100/7/AMR/2022)
CIN - U15499AP1992PLC014032,
Having Registered Office at
9-14 18/1, C.B.M.COMPOUND, VISAKHAPATNAMVISAKHAPATNAM,
VISAKHAPATNAM, Andhra Pradesh, India, 530003.
5. M/s. SREI Equipment Finance Limited,
Vishwakarma, 86C, Topsia Road,
Kolkata -700046, West Bengal.
6. Mr. Y. Appaji,
S/o. Laxmana Swamy,
Aged about 51 years, Occ; Business,
R/o. H. No. 6-1-279, Saptagiri Apartments,
Padmarao Nagar, Secunderabad - 500025.
7. Mr. Reddapa Reddy Kothakota Vanam,
S/o. Venkata Reddy Kothakota, Aged about 49 years,
Occ: Business, R/o. Plot No.9, Gourav Garden,
4th Road, Ananthapur, Andhra Pradesh -501504.
8. Mr. Sandeep Reddy Chillakur,
S/o. Ravindra Reddy,
Aged about 38 years, Occ: Business,
R/o. H.No. 13-1-105/9/401, Mothi Nagar Road
No. 3, Hyderabad - 500018.
9. M/s. Ares and Sons,
Rep. by Partner C.H.G.K Murthy,
Office at: Plot No. 7, 4th Floor, Verizon Metropoliton,
Safari Nagar, Kondapur, Hyderabad - 500082. ...Respondents
With
Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 534/2025
Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) Nos. 533, 534 & 544 / 2025 Page 2 of 13
(IA Nos. 1501, 1502, 1503 & 1504/2025)
In the matter of :
1. Mr. Ravi Ramesh Babu,
S/o. Koteswara Rao,
A/a. 46 years, Occ: Cultivation,
R/o. D.No. 5-127, Ravivaripalem, Mopidevi,
Mopidevi Mandal, Krishna Distrct - 521125.
2. Mr. Mopidevi Babu Rao,
S/o. Venkateswarulu,
A/a. 50 years, Occ: Business,
R/o. D.No. 2-228, Mopidevi,
Mopidevi Mandal, Krishna Distrct-521125.
Both represented by their GPA Holder,
Kantamneni Shiva Shankar,
S/o. Venkateshwara Rao, A/a. 61 years,
R/o. Ravivaripalem, Mopidevi, Mopidevi Mandal,
Krishna District - 521125. .... Appellants
V
1. Mr. Rajesh Chillale
Former Resolution Professional
Chairman, Monitoring Committee for
M/s. Bharatiya Vaidhya Vidhan Limited,
Office at: B-713, Western Plaza, OU Colony,
HS Darga, Manikonda,
Hyderabad, Telangana - 500008.
2. M/s. Bharatiya Vaidhya Vidhan Limited ("Corporate Debtor")
Regd. Office at W-24/1820/86, Military Colony,
Dargah Mitta, Nellor, A.P - 524003
3. Monitoring Committee for,
M/s. Bharatiya Vaidhya Vidhan Limited,
(IN SUCCESSION, Vide Order Dt. 30.01.2025 in
IA(IBC)/376/2023 in CP (IB) 100/7/AMR/2022)
Rep. by its Chairman Mr. Rajesh Chillale
Office at: B-713, Western Plaza, OU Colony,
HS Darga, Manikonda,
Hyderabad, Telangana - 500008.
Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) Nos. 533, 534 & 544 / 2025 Page 3 of 13
4. M/s Devi Sea Foods Limited
('Successful Resolution Applicant' or 'SRA')
(IN SUCCESSION, Vide Order Dt. 30.01.2025 in
IA(IBC)/376/2023 in CP (IB) 100/7/AMR/2022)
CIN - U15499AP1992PLC014032,
Having Registered Office at
9-14 18/1, C.B.M.COMPOUND, VISAKHAPATNAMVISAKHAPATNAM,
VISAKHAPATNAM, Andhra Pradesh, India, 530003.
5. M/s. SREI Equipment Finance Limited,
Vishwakarma, 86C, Topsia Road,
Kolkata -700046, West Bengal.
6. Mr. Y. Appaji,
S/o. Laxmana Swamy,
Aged about 51 years, Occ; Business,
R/o. H. No. 6-1-279, Saptagiri Apartments,
Padmarao Nagar, Secunderabad - 500025.
7. Mr. Reddapa Reddy Kothakota Vanam,
S/o. Venkata Reddy Kothakota, Aged about 49 years,
Occ: Business, R/o. Plot No.9, Gourav Garden,
4th Road, Ananthapur, Andhra Pradesh -501504.
8. Mr. Sandeep Reddy Chillakur,
S/o. Ravindra Reddy,
Aged about 38 years, Occ: Business,
R/o. H.No. 13-1-105/9/401, Mothi Nagar Road
No. 3, Hyderabad - 500018.
9. M/s. Ares and Sons,
Rep. by Partner C.H.G.K Murthy,
Office at: Plot No. 7, 4th Floor, Verizon Metropoliton,
Safari Nagar, Kondapur, Hyderabad - 500082. ...Respondents
With
Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 544/2025
(IA Nos. 1526, 1527, 1528 & 1529/2025)
In the matter of :
1. Mr. Ravi Ramesh Babu,
S/o. Koteswara Rao,
A/a. 46 years, Occ: Cultivation,
Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) Nos. 533, 534 & 544 / 2025 Page 4 of 13
R/o. D.No. 5-127, Ravivaripalem, Mopidevi,
Mopidevi Mandal, Krishna Distrct - 521125.
2. Mr. Mopidevi Babu Rao,
S/o. Venkateswarulu,
A/a. 50 years, Occ: Business,
R/o. D.No. 2-228, Mopidevi,
Mopidevi Mandal, Krishna Distrct-521125.
Both represented by their GPA Holder,
Kantamneni Shiva Shankar,
S/o. Venkateshwara Rao, A/a. 61 years,
R/o. Ravivaripalem, Mopidevi, Mopidevi Mandal,
Krishna District - 521125. .... Appellants
V
1. Mr. Rajesh Chillale
Former Resolution Professional
Chairman, Monitoring Committee for
M/s. Bharatiya Vaidhya Vidhan Limited,
Office at: B-713, Western Plaza, OU Colony,
HS Darga, Manikonda,
Hyderabad, Telangana - 500008.
2. M/s. Bharatiya Vaidhya Vidhan Limited ("Corporate Debtor")
Regd. Office at W-24/1820/86, Military Colony,
Dargah Mitta, Nellor, A.P - 524003
3. Monitoring Committee for,
M/s. Bharatiya Vaidhya Vidhan Limited,
(IN SUCCESSION, Vide Order Dt. 30.01.2025 in
IA(IBC)/376/2023 in CP (IB) 100/7/AMR/2022)
Rep. by its Chairman Mr. Rajesh Chillale
Office at: B-713, Western Plaza, OU Colony,
HS Darga, Manikonda,
Hyderabad, Telangana - 500008.
4. M/s Devi Sea Foods Limited
('Successful Resolution Applicant' or 'SRA')
(IN SUCCESSION, Vide Order Dt. 30.01.2025 in
IA(IBC)/376/2023 in CP (IB) 100/7/AMR/2022)
CIN - U15499AP1992PLC014032,
Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) Nos. 533, 534 & 544 / 2025 Page 5 of 13
Having Registered Office at
9-14 18/1, C.B.M.COMPOUND, VISAKHAPATNAMVISAKHAPATNAM,
VISAKHAPATNAM, Andhra Pradesh, India, 530003.
5. M/s. SREI Equipment Finance Limited,
Vishwakarma, 86C, Topsia Road,
Kolkata -700046, West Bengal.
6. Mr. Y. Appaji,
S/o. Laxmana Swamy,
Aged about 51 years, Occ; Business,
R/o. H. No. 6-1-279, Saptagiri Apartments,
Padmarao Nagar, Secunderabad - 500025.
7. Mr. Reddapa Reddy Kothakota Vanam,
S/o. Venkata Reddy Kothakota, Aged about 49 years,
Occ: Business, R/o. Plot No.9, Gourav Garden,
4th Road, Ananthapur, Andhra Pradesh -501504.
8. Mr. Sandeep Reddy Chillakur,
S/o. Ravindra Reddy,
Aged about 38 years, Occ: Business,
R/o. H.No. 13-1-105/9/401, Mothi Nagar Road
No. 3, Hyderabad - 500018.
9. M/s. Ares and Sons,
Rep. by Partner C.H.G.K Murthy,
Office at: Plot No. 7, 4th Floor, Verizon Metropoliton,
Safari Nagar, Kondapur, Hyderabad - 500082. ...Respondents
Present:
For Appellants : Mr. Asad Hussain, Advocate
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode) 05.12.2025 :
Oral Judgment : Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, Member (Judicial):
1. These are a set of three Company Appeals, namely Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 533 / 2025, Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 534 / 2025, Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) Nos. 533, 534 & 544 / 2025 Page 6 of 13 and Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 544 / 2025. However, for the sake of brevity, each of them is being dealt with independently.
2. Since they involve identical questions of fact and law, a common consideration is required.
A) Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 533 / 2025:
3. In Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 533 / 2025, the Appeal has been preferred by the Appellants, who admittedly happen to be the shareholders of the Corporate Debtor. They question and challenge the judgment dated 30.01.2025 passed by the Ld. NCLT, Amaravati Bench, in IA (IBC) / 376 / 2023, which was preferred in CP (IB) / 100 / 7 / AMR / 2022. By virtue of the impugned order passed by the Ld. Tribunal, while considering the application preferred under Sections 30(6) and 31 of the I & B Code, 2016, read with Regulation 39(4) of the IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process of Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016, the Tribunal proceeded to approve the Resolution Plan.
4. The Company Appeal is accompanied by a Condonation of Delay Application, being IA No. 1500 / 2025, wherein the Appellants sought condonation of a delay of 5 days in preferring the Appeal, whereas the Registry reported a delay of 8 days.
Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) Nos. 533, 534 & 544 / 2025 Page 7 of 13
5. Having heard the Ld. Counsel for the Appellants on the Condonation of Delay Application, and after considering the grounds raised therein, coupled with the fact that the number of days of delay sought to be condoned falls well within the ambit of the proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 61 of the I & B Code, 2016, the delay stands condoned and IA No. 1500 / 2025 stands allowed.
6. The Ld. Counsel for the Appellants was heard on the merits of the Appeal.
Primarily, the issue is that the Resolution Plan has already been approved against the Corporate Debtor in proceedings held before the Ld. Adjudicating Authority, wherein the Corporate Debtor chose not to file a counter and instead raised objections through written submissions. If there were any grievances against the approved Resolution Plan, they could only have been raised by the Corporate Debtor, represented by its Suspended Board / Directors. The shareholders, independently, have no right under law to maintain an Appeal under Section 61 of the Code against an order approving a Resolution Plan.
7. This principle has been propounded by the Larger Bench of this Appellate Tribunal in Park Energy Private Limited v. State Bank of India & Anr., Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 62 / 2023, wherein it was observed that shareholders, in their individual capacity, have no independent right under law to initiate proceedings before the Tribunal or to file an Appeal under Section 61 of the Code. Their rights are limited to the extent of their investment in the share Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) Nos. 533, 534 & 544 / 2025 Page 8 of 13 capital of the Corporate Debtor, and they have no vested right to challenge the Resolution Plan.
8. Since the Company Appeal at the behest of shareholders is not maintainable, Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 533 / 2025 stands dismissed as not maintainable.
B) Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 534 / 2025:
9. This Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 534 / 2025 has been preferred by the Appellants, who also admittedly happen to be the shareholders of the Corporate Debtor. In this Appeal, the Appellants have challenged the propriety of the impugned order dated 30.01.2025 passed by the Ld. NCLT, Amaravati Bench, in IA (IBC) / 13 / 2024, preferred in CP / IB / 100 / 7 / AMR / 2022.
10. The Appeal is accompanied by a Condonation of Delay Application, being IA No. 1501 / 2025, wherein the Appellants sought condonation of a delay of 5 days, whereas the Registry reported a delay of 8 days.
11. Having heard the Ld. Counsel for the Appellants and considering the grounds taken in the Application, and since the delay falls within the ambit of the proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 61 of the I & B Code, 2016, the delay stands condoned and IA No. 1501 / 2025 stands allowed.
Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) Nos. 533, 534 & 544 / 2025 Page 9 of 13
12. In the instant Company Appeal, the challenge is to the adjudication made in IA (IBC) / 13 / 2024. The Applicants therein had preferred the said application under Section 65 of the Code, read with Rules 11 and 34 of the NCLT Rules, 2016, seeking the reliefs detailed therein.
13. Primarily, the sole contention of the Appellants was that appropriate action be taken against Respondent No. 2 or any other person under Section 65 of the Code for initiating malicious proceedings before the Ld. Adjudicating Authority.
14. The Ld. Tribunal, after considering the rival contentions and upon exchange of pleadings, observed that IA (IBC) / 288 / 2023, filed by M/s. Kanti Conductors Private Limited and decided on 29.11.2023, sought almost similar reliefs, which had already been dismissed. The Tribunal had denied exclusion of the subject property and rejected the reliefs prayed therein.
15. Based on the observations made in the judgment dated 29.11.2023 in IA (IBC) / 288 / 2023, the present Application was rejected. Consequently, the Resolution Plan under challenge had already been approved and implemented, as stated by the Ld. Counsel for the Successful Resolution Applicant.
16. Be that as it may, since the relief sought by the Appellants was in their capacity as shareholders of the Corporate Debtor, and in light of the judgment of the Larger Bench of this Appellate Tribunal referred to above, proceedings at the Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) Nos. 533, 534 & 544 / 2025 Page 10 of 13 behest of shareholders are not maintainable. The Appellants have no vested right to independently initiate such proceedings, as their rights are limited under law.
17. Accordingly, applying the ratio of the Larger Bench, Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 534 / 2025 also stands dismissed.
C) Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 544 / 2025:
18. In Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 544 / 2025, the Appellants challenge the impugned order dated 30.01.2025 passed by the Ld. NCLT, Amaravati Bench, in INV. P (IBC) / 1 / 2024 in IA (IBC) / 376 / 2023 in CP / IB / 100 / 7 / AMR / 2022.
19. The Appellants filed IA No. 1529 / 2025 seeking condonation of a delay of 5 days in filing the Company Appeal, whereas the Registry reported a delay of 8 days. After hearing the Ld. Counsel for the Appellants and considering the reasons stated in paragraphs II(ii) and II(iii) of the Application, IA No. 1529 / 2025 stands allowed and the delay stands condoned.
20. The order under challenge pertains to the dismissal of the Intervention Petition (IBC) / 1 / 2024, preferred in IA (IBC) / 376 / 2023, by the Ld. Tribunal on 30.01.2025. The Applicants had invoked Section 60(5) of the I & B Code, 2016, read with Rules 11 and 34 of the NCLT Rules, 2016, seeking to implead Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) Nos. 533, 534 & 544 / 2025 Page 11 of 13 themselves as parties to IA (IBC) / 376 / 2023, which is the Plan Approval Application.
21. The Ld. Tribunal rejected the said request in light of the decision dated 29.11.2023 rendered in IA (IBC) / 288 / 2023, preferred by M/s. Kanti Conductors Private Limited. The Ld. Tribunal observed that the Adjudicating Authority is empowered only to scrutinize the propriety of the Resolution Plan approved by the Committee of Creditors in accordance with the voting share of the Financial Creditors. It further observed that the Adjudicating Authority has no authority to intervene beyond the scope of the approved Resolution Plan, except on the grounds specified under the Code. Its jurisdiction is limited to ensuring compliance with the mandatory requirements under Section 30(2) of the Code.
22. The Ld. Tribunal for the aforesaid reason rejected the application. Challenging the same, the present Company Appeal has been preferred by the Appellants. Since, the Appellants question the impugned order in the capacity of being the shareholders on the ground of alleged theory of fraud because, it was alleged that the Corporate Debtor had colluded and had not contested the proceedings on merits by filing a counter and rather only filed a written submission. This, in itself cannot be inferred to be a collusion to attach fraud to the proceedings and if at all there will be an aggrieved party, it would be the Corporate Debtor and not the Shareholders of the Corporate Debtor because, the Shareholders, as it has been already observed in the Larger Bench's decision Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) Nos. 533, 534 & 544 / 2025 Page 12 of 13 referred to hereinabove, have got a very restricted right under the I & B Code, 2016, to initiate and contest proceedings under Section 61 of the Code. Since the Appellants being the Shareholders have got no right to sustain the Appeal, the instant Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 544 / 2025, would accordingly stand dismissed. All pending connected Interlocutory Applications, if any, would stand closed.
[Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma] Member (Judicial) [Jatindranath Swain] Member (Technical) SR / MS Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) Nos. 533, 534 & 544 / 2025 Page 13 of 13