Back to Mumbai

NCLT Mumbai Dismisses Rs 11.73 Crore Insolvency Petition Against Struck Off Company

NCLT Mumbai Dismisses Rs 11.73 Crore Insolvency Petition Against Struck Off Company

On July 15, 2026, the Mumbai Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) dismissed a Rs 11.73-crore insolvency petition filed by Adamji Investments Private Limited against M Cons Media Marketing Private Limited. The tribunal ruled that corporate insolvency proceedings cannot be initiated or maintained against a company whose name has already been struck off by the Registrar of Companies.

The petition, filed under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, sought to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against M Cons Media Marketing. Adamji Investments claimed a default of Rs 11.73 crore, which included Rs 2.18 crore in principal and Rs 9.55 crore in contractual interest.

According to the petitioner, the two parties had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding in February 2014. Under this agreement, Adamji Investments was to extend financial assistance of up to Rs 3 crore to the respondent. The petitioner claimed it disbursed over Rs 2.33 crore, and the debt, carrying an interest rate of 24 percent per annum, became payable on February 26, 2020.

During the NCLT proceedings, it was revealed that the Registrar of Companies had struck off M Cons Media Marketing from the register of companies on April 7, 2022, by issuing Form STK-7. This action followed an earlier public notice published in December 2021.

The NCLT bench noted that Adamji Investments had not taken any steps to restore the company's name under Sections 248(8) or 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013, before filing the insolvency petition.

The tribunal also addressed the service of notice on the respondent, which reportedly occurred on March 17, 2025. The bench ruled that this notice could not be treated as valid because the company had already ceased to exist in law.

The NCLT stated that serving a notice to a non-existent entity violates the principles of natural justice. It concluded that because the respondent company was dissolved and its Certificate of Incorporation cancelled, it no longer satisfied the definition of a Corporate Debtor under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

Share

Related Stories