M/S JSW STEEL LIMITED versus PRATISHTHA THAKUR HARITWAL & ORS.

M/S JSW STEEL LIMITED versus PRATISHTHA THAKUR HARITWAL & ORS.

The Court held that the demands raised by the respondents for periods prior to the date on which the NCLT approved the resolution plan were contemptuous because under the law declared in Ghanshyam Mishra all claims not included in an approved resolution plan stand extinguished and cannot be the subject of recovery proceedings; consequently the demand notices and all proceedings pursuant thereto were illegal and are quashed and set aside, although no punitive action was taken against the respondents who tendered unconditional apology.

Parties
Petitioner: M/s JSW Steel Limited (formerly M/s JSW Ispat Special Products Limited); Respondent: Pratishtha Thakur Haritwal & Ors. (alleged contemnors / respondents)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
27 March 2025
Procedural Posture
Contempt Petition (civil) No. 629 of 2023 / Disposed (final Judgment Dated 27 March 2025)
Outcome
Contempt petition disposed of; contempt found in respect of continuation of recovery proceedings but no punitive action taken
Legal Topics
Resolution Plan Approval, Extinguishment of Claims Not Included in Resolution Plan, Statutory Dues, Demand Notices, Binding Effect of Approved Resolution Plan
Insolvency Law Contempt of Court Tax Law Constitutional Law Resolution Plan Approval Extinguishment of Claims Not Included in Resolution Plan Statutory Dues Demand Notices +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M/s JSW Steel Limited (formerly M/s JSW Ispat Special Products Limited)

Petitioner

Pratishtha Thakur Haritwal & Ors. (alleged contemnors / respondents)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contempt Petition (civil) No. 629 of 2023 / Disposed (final Judgment Dated 27 March 2025)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claims not part of an approved resolution plan stand extinguished and cannot be recovered by Central/State/local authorities
  2. 2 Whether the respondents could proceed with recovery proceedings after the judgment in Ghanshyam Mishra was brought to their notice
  3. 3 Whether failure of a stakeholder to file claim during CIRP binds it after approval of the resolution plan

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the demands raised by the respondents for periods prior to the date on which the NCLT approved the resolution plan were contemptuous because under the law declared in Ghanshyam Mishra all claims not included in an approved resolution plan stand extinguished and cannot be the subject of recovery proceedings; consequently the demand notices and all proceedings pursuant thereto were illegal and are quashed and set aside, although no punitive action was taken against the respondents who tendered unconditional apology.

Court Disposition

Contempt petition disposed of; contempt found in respect of continuation of recovery proceedings but no punitive action taken

Orders

  • I.A. No.21914 of 2024 for amendment of cause title allowed (cause title amended)
  • The demand notices issued by the alleged contemnors on the Petitioner Company and all proceedings pursuant thereto are quashed and set aside