Resolution professional fraternity untouched by contempt, needs to be taught a lesson: NCLAT Chennai

The Chennai Bench of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) on Tuesday initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against a resolution professional (RP) for allegedly attempting to bypass an interim appellate order. [National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench v. Anil Kumar Khicha, IRP, ISPT India Pvt Ltd].A coram of judicial member Justice (retd) Sharad Kumar Sharma and technical member Jatindranath Swain said,“This art of filing an application superseding the orders passed by this Tribunal by way of articulating the relief in a manner to override the interim order, that is a clever device. And for that someone has to be taught a lesson, particularly to this fraternity which is untouched in contempt.”.The dispute began when Indo Shell Mould initiated insolvency proceedings, alleging a breach of a settlement agreement from August 2023. The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) originally admitted the company into the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) on September 15, 2025. However, following an appeal by the suspended director, the NCLAT issued an interim order on October 27, 2025, directing that the insolvency admission be kept in abeyance.The conflict escalated when the interim RP, Anil Kumar Khicha, allegedly defied the stay order. Despite the Tribunal's direction to pause the insolvency process, the IRP sent an email on November 10, 2025, claiming that because the Tribunal had not expressly directed him to hand back management, he was not required to return control to the Board of Directors. The Tribunal viewed this as the IRP "sitting over" judicial orders by applying his own alternative interpretation to a clear legal stay.In a hearing on December 22, 2025, the NCLAT Bench characterised the IRP's conduct as contemptuous and initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against him..During the hearing today, it was argued that the application was filed due to a misunderstanding of the interim order. The Tribunal rejected this explanation.“He is not misinformed sir, he is a qualified person who knows technicalities of procedure. He knows how to play with the words. He knows how to play with the proceedings also.”The Bench also clarified that the individual concerned could not seek indulgence as a layperson.“Listen, he’s not a layman. Remember that.”.When regret was expressed and leniency was sought, the Tribunal cautioned against assuming that the contempt would be waived.“Don’t anticipate an order that it will be waiver of contempt or something. It may be something else also.”The Bench stressed that the issue went beyond the individual and touched upon institutional authority.“Not a question of mercy. Question is the magnanimity of the institution has to be maintained…If he has derelicted in that then he will face the consequences.”The RP has been directed to file a response to the contempt notice..The Tribunal directed that the contempt proceedings be listed along with the connected insolvency appeals, where interim orders continue to operate..Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.