The NCLAT Chennai closed suo motu contempt proceedings against IRP Anil Kumar Khicha after accepting his unconditional apology, as the Bench led by Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma held his conduct unacceptable but allowed closure with future caution assurance.
CHENNAI: Weeks after noting that the resolution professional community was “untouched by contempt” and needed to be “taught a lesson,” the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) in Chennai has closed suo motu contempt proceedings against interim resolution professional (IRP) Anil Kumar Khicha, following his unconditional apology.
A Bench consisting of judicial member, retired Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, and technical member Jatindranath Swain determined that while the IRP’s behavior was unacceptable, the contempt proceedings would be closed due to his apology and his commitment to exercise caution moving forward.
The NCLAT’s order stated,
“We proceed to accept his unconditional apology with a warning that he should be cautious in future while discharging his official responsibilities as an IRP,”
The issue arose when Indo Shell Mould filed insolvency proceedings against ISPT India Pvt Ltd, claiming a violation of a settlement agreement from August 2023.
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) initially admitted the company into the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) on September 15, 2025. However, after an appeal by the suspended director, the NCLAT issued an interim order on October 27, 2025, instructing that the insolvency admission be put on hold.
The situation escalated when the interim RP, Anil Kumar Khicha, reportedly disregarded the stay order. Despite the NCLT’s instruction to halt the insolvency process, the IRP sent an email on November 10, 2025, stating that since the tribunal had not specifically instructed him to return management, he was not obliged to relinquish control to the Board of Directors.
The tribunal interpreted this as the IRP “sitting over” judicial orders by presenting his own alternative understanding of a clear legal stay.
ALSO READ: Flipkart Dominance Case: Supreme Court Sets Aside NCLAT Order, Directs to Reconsider Case
During a hearing on December 22, 2025, the NCLAT Bench labeled the IRP’s conduct as contemptuous and initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against him.
In its January 29 ruling, the Bench reiterated that once an interim order was in effect that suspended the contested NCLT order, the IRP could not proceed by creating exceptions or adopting a contradictory interpretation of the stay.
The tribunal noted that the IRP appeared in person, submitted his response, and offered an unconditional apology, along with an assurance that he would be more careful in the future regarding the interpretation of orders and would avoid acting in violation of them.
The NCLAT closed the contempt case based on the apology, although the tribunal expressed dissatisfaction with the explanations the IRP provided about his conduct.
Advocate Raghav Rajeev Menon represented the IRP.
CASE TITLE: NCLAT, Chennai Bench v. Anil Kumar Khicha, IRP, ISPT India Pvt Ltd
READ ATTACHMENT: