SC on threshold limit of 100 allottees – second proviso to section 7(1) of IBC on the date of Insolvency Petition
Coming to the threshold limit of 100 allottees prescribed by the second proviso to section 7(1) of IBC, in all 103 allottes applied to the NCLT. However, it was contended that 28 allottees had taken possession, 13 allottees were given refund at the time of passing admission order. In that context, the SC held that there is no documentary evidence of settlement and secondly, the threshold limit is to be counted on the date of filing of petition.
The core question raised before us on behalf of the appellants is whether the threshold limit of 100 allottees prescribed by the second proviso to Section 7(1) of the Code stood fulfilled in the case on hand. It is contended that, out of the 103 allottees who had applied to the NCLT, 28 allottees had taken possession while 13 allottees were refunded their monies by the time of passing of the admission order. It is further claimed that 7 allottees signed settlement deeds but did not take possession due to registration formalities. Therefore, according to the appellants, the petitioning allottees with unsettled claims were only 55 in number. It is on this basis that Satinder Singh Bhasin filed an interlocutory application before the NCLAT, after judgment was reserved in the appeals, offering to pay Rs. 15.62 crores to settle the claims of those 55 allottees. 21. However, as noted by the NCLT, no documentary evidence was produced before it in proof of settlements having been arrived at with any of the allottees shown as petitioners in the company petition, prior to the filing thereof. In any event, the day of reckoning stands settled by this Court in Manish Kumar (supra), wherein it was held that the crucial date for ascertaining whether the threshold is adequately met is the date of filing of the petition and not the date of the admission or hearing thereof.
Judgment dated 2.2.2026 of the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.13628 of 2025 of Satinder Singh Bhasin Vs. Col. Gautam Mullick and others with connected civil appeal.
