---
title: "NCLAT Dismisses Appeal in Taguda Pte Ltd. Case: A Significant Ruling on Resolution Plan Implementation"
date: 2025-06-25
author: "Shrishail Kittad"
url: https://www.indialaw.in/blog/insolvency-bankruptcy/nclat-on-taguda-pte-ltd-appeal/
---

# NCLAT Dismisses Appeal in Taguda Pte Ltd. Case: A Significant Ruling on Resolution Plan Implementation

Posted On - 25 June, 2025 •

By - [Shrishail Kittad](https://www.indialaw.in/people/adv-shrishail-kittad/ "Posts by Shrishail Kittad") and [Rahul Sundaram](https://www.indialaw.in/people/rahul-sundaram/ "Posts by Rahul Sundaram")

[![NCLAT Dismisses Appeal in Taguda Pte Ltd. Case](https://www.indialaw.in/wp-content/uploads/R.jpg)](https://www.indialaw.in/wp-content/uploads/R.jpg)

In a landmark decision, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) dismissed an appeal filed by Taguda Pte Ltd., a successful resolution applicant (SRA), challenging the National Company Law Tribunal’s (NCLT) order directing the implementation of a resolution plan for Ushdev International Limited. The case, Taguda Pte Ltd. v. State Bank of India & Anr. (Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 351 of 2024), highlights critical issues surrounding the timely implementation of resolution plans under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC).

## Background of the Case

The corporate debtor, Ushdev International Limited, was admitted to the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) on 17.05.2018 by the NCLT, Mumbai Bench, on an application filed under Section 7 by the State Bank of India (SBI). The appellant, Taguda Pte Ltd., submitted a revised resolution plan on 22.06.2021, which was approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) with 91.06% vote shares. The NCLT approved the plan on 03.02.2022. However, the implementation of the resolution plan faced challenges due to the non-receipt of necessary approvals from regulatory authorities, including the Reserve Bank of India (RBI).

## Key Events Leading to the Appeal

Despite multiple meetings and efforts, the appellant failed to secure the required approvals within the stipulated time. On 08.12.2023, the NCLT passed an order directing the appellant to implement the resolution plan within two months. The appellant challenged this order before the NCLAT, arguing that the NCLT’s order modified the resolution plan’s implementation timeline, which was beyond its jurisdiction.

## Rival Contentions

The appellant contended that the resolution plan could not be implemented due to the non-receipt of necessary approvals from the RBI, which was a condition precedent. The appellant argued that the closing date for the implementation of the resolution plan would only commence after all government approvals were granted. The respondent SBI, countered that the appellant had failed to obtain necessary regulatory approvals within the stipulated period, leading to a breach of the resolution plan. The respondents highlighted that the resolution plan was approved on 03.02.2022, and more than three years had elapsed without implementation, necessitating liquidation proceedings.

## PNB’s Submissions and NCLAT’s Observations

Punjab National Bank (PNB), as the authorized dealer of the corporate debtor, played a crucial role in seeking the necessary regulatory approvals from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI). PNB submitted that it had taken all necessary steps to secure the required regulatory approvals for the resolution plan of Ushdev International Limited. However, the RBI did not grant the approval due to certain regulatory contraventions related to the issuance of corporate guarantees and proposed capital account transactions requiring compounding. PNB highlighted that it had applied for the regulatory approval but did not receive it, which delayed the implementation of the resolution plan.

The NCLAT observed that despite PNB’s efforts, the RBI’s non-approval was due to regulatory issues that needed to be addressed. The tribunal noted that the resolution applicant, Taguda Pte Ltd., had failed to secure the necessary approvals within the stipulated period as mandated under Section 31(4) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). This failure led to delays in implementing the resolution plan. NCLAT emphasized that the obligation to obtain regulatory approvals rested with the resolution applicant, and the one-year period prescribed under Section 31(4) of the IBC had expired. The tribunal concluded that the resolution plan could not be implemented solely on the pretext of pending RBI approval, especially since the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient progress in securing the necessary approvals .

## Legal Provisions and Judgments Relied Upon

The NCLAT relied on several legal provisions and judgments, including Section 31(4) of the IBC, which mandates that the resolution applicant must obtain all necessary approvals under any law within one year from the date of approval of the resolution plan. The tribunal also referred to Clause 3.1 of the Request for Resolution Plan (RFRP), which specifies that the resolution applicant is responsible for obtaining all necessary statutory and regulatory approvals. The NCLAT cited the judgment in Independent Sugar Corporation Ltd. v. Girish Sriram Juneja & Ors., which interpreted the provisions of Section 31(4) and emphasized the importance of obtaining prior approvals .

## Analysis of the Court

The NCLAT analysed the case by noting that the resolution plan was approved on 03.02.2022, and the appellant had failed to obtain necessary approvals within the statutory period of one year. The tribunal observed that the NCLT’s order granting an additional two months for implementation did not amount to a modification of the resolution plan but rather provided an extension to fulfil the plan’s conditions. The NCLAT noted that the appellant’s failure to secure regulatory approvals and deposit the required funds indicated a lack of capacity to implement the plan. The tribunal also highlighted that the appellant had sought multiple extensions and had not shown sufficient progress in obtaining the necessary approvals.

## Final Decision

The NCLAT dismissed the appeal, holding that the NCLT had the jurisdiction to direct the appellant to implement the resolution plan within a specified timeframe. The tribunal concluded that the appellant’s failure to obtain necessary approvals within the stipulated period justified the initiation of liquidation proceedings. The [NCLAT](https://nclat.nic.in/) requested the NCLT to decide the pending liquidation application at an early date, preferably within three months from the date of the order .

## Conclusion

The NCLAT’s decision in Taguda Pte Ltd. v. State Bank of India & Anr. elaborates the importance of timely implementation of resolution plans under the IBC. The tribunal’s ruling highlights the critical need for resolution applicants to adhere to statutory timelines and obtain necessary regulatory approvals promptly. This case sets a precedent for future insolvency proceedings, emphasizing the NCLT’s jurisdiction to enforce resolution plans and the consequences of failing to meet regulatory requirements.

For further details write to [contact@indialaw.in](mailto:contact@indialaw.in)

Disclaimer - This article is intended for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Readers should seek specific legal counsel in relation to their individual circumstances.

[Download PDF](https://www.indialaw.in/blog/insolvency-bankruptcy/nclat-on-taguda-pte-ltd-appeal//pdf/)

[Insolvency & Bankruptcy](https://www.indialaw.in/expertise/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-laws/)

---

# IndiaLaw LLP — Offices & Contact Details

---

## General Contact

| | |
|---|---|
| **Website** | https://www.indialaw.in |
| **Primary email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Primary phone** | +91 836-9995919 |
| **Contact form** | https://www.indialaw.in/connect/ |
| **Careers (separate channel)** | https://www.indialaw.in/careers/ |


---

## All Offices (9 locations across 8 cities)

### 1. Mumbai — Registered Office & Head Office (Apeejay Chambers)

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | Apeejay Chambers, Ground Floor, Wallace Street, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 |
| **Phone** | [022-6924-7400](tel:02269247400) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/mumbai/ |
| **Practice focus** | Litigation · Arbitration · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Corporate · Banking · Real Estate · IP |
| **Notes** | The HQ. 5 partners based here. Handles PAN-India litigation, arbitration, corporate, banking, IP and real estate practice. Largest team across all offices. |

### 2. Mumbai — Non-Litigation Office (Excelsior, Fort)

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | 4th Floor, New Excelsior Theatre Pvt. Ltd., Amrit Keshav Nayak Marg, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 |
| **Phone** | [022-697-40500](tel:022-697-40500) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/mumbai/ |
| **Practice focus** | Non-litigation only — consultations, negotiations, transactional work |
| **Notes** | Opened 2024. Litigation and arbitration remain at the Apeejay Chambers head office. |

### 3. Delhi

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | Flat No. 1107 & 1108, Prakashdeep Building, Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001 |
| **Phone** | (general line: +91 836-9995919) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/delhi/ |
| **Practice focus** | Litigation · Arbitration · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Corporate · Banking · Real Estate |
| **Notes** | 3 partners based here. Located near the Supreme Court of India, Delhi High Court and other appellate bodies. |

### 4. Kolkata

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | Centre Point Building, Room No. 214, 2nd Floor, Premises No. 21, Hemanta Basu Sarani, Opp. Great Eastern Hotel, P.S. Hare Street, Kolkata – 700 001, West Bengal |
| **Phone** | [+91 33 4813 1001](tel:+913348131001) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/kolkata/ |
| **Practice focus** | Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Commercial & Civil Litigation · Arbitration · Banking Litigation · Real Estate · Labour & Employment · Consumer |
| **Notes** | Advises banks, NBFCs, MSMEs and corporates on transactions and dispute resolution. Works in close coordination with the Mumbai HO. |

### 5. Chennai

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | GF-A, 19 Casa Major Road, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008 |
| **Phone** | (general line: +91 836-9995919) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/chennai/ |
| **Practice focus** | Litigation · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Real Estate |
| **Notes** | Full-fledged office with experienced legal team. Supported by Mumbai HO. |

### 6. Bengaluru (Bangalore)

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | INDIALAW LLP, No. 7 Chinnaswamy Mudaliar Road, Shivaji Nagar, Bangalore – 560 051 |
| **Phone** | [080-4167-2444](tel:08041672444) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/bengaluru/ |
| **Practice focus** | Litigation · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Real Estate · Family Laws · Labour |
| **Notes** | Located near Bangalore High Court. Handles corporate, commercial, banking and matrimonial disputes. |

### 7. Hyderabad

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | 403, 4th Floor, Sanatana Ecstasy Building, beside Tanishq Show Room, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad – 500 029, Telangana |
| **Phone** | [040-6666-5166](tel:04066665166) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/hyderabad/ |
| **Practice focus** | Litigation · Banking · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Real Estate |
| **Notes** | Particularly well known for complex banking matters and real estate transactions. |

### 8. Cochin (Kochi)

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | Second Floor, Pulikkal Building, K.K. Padmanabhan Road, Ernakulam North – 682 018, Kerala |
| **Phone** | [0484-3583961](tel:04843583961) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/cochin/ |
| **Practice focus** | Litigation · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Real Estate |
| **Notes** | Commercial disputes, property litigation, financial-claim arbitrations and real estate transactions. |

### 9. Noida (NCR)

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | No. 16 & 17, Silver Offices, 17th Floor, Wave One, Sector 18, Noida – 201 301 |
| **Phone** | (general line: +91 836-9995919) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/noida/ |
| **Practice focus** | Aviation · Insurance · Mergers & Acquisitions · Corporate |
| **Office head** | **Mr. Dinesh Gupta** (joined August 2025 to lead and expand the corporate practice) |
| **Notes** | Newest office. Sector-focused on highly regulated industries serving NCR-based clients. |

---

## Quick-Dial Phone List

| Office | Phone |
|---|---|
| Mumbai HO (Apeejay) | 022-6924-7400 |
| Mumbai Excelsior | 022-697-40500 |
| Kolkata | +91 33 4813 1001 |
| Bengaluru | 080-4167-2444 |
| Hyderabad | 040-6666-5166 |
| Cochin | 0484-3583961 |
| **General / Marketing line** | **+91 836-9995919** |

Delhi, Chennai and Noida route through the general number.

---

## Social Channels

- LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/indialaw
- X / Twitter: https://twitter.com/Indialawmumbai
- Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/indialawllp/
- Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/indialawllp

---