NCLAT Revives Culver Max Insolvency Plea, Sends Case Back to NCLT for Fresh Hearing

Tribunal Flags Procedural Lapse in Rejection of Application​

In a relief to Culver Max Entertainment, formerly known as Sony Pictures Network India, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal has set aside an earlier order that had rejected the broadcaster’s insolvency plea against an Odisha-based fintech firm.

The appellate tribunal has remanded the matter to the Cuttack bench of the National Company Law Tribunal for a fresh hearing, directing that Culver Max be given an opportunity to cure procedural defects in its application.

Opportunity to Rectify Defects Was Denied, Says NCLAT​

The NCLAT observed that the NCLT should have granted Culver Max an opportunity to rectify defects in its insolvency application instead of dismissing it outright. The tribunal held that such an opportunity was not provided in the present case, rendering the April 30, 2024 order legally unsustainable.

A two-member NCLAT bench comprising Justice Yogesh Khanna, Member Judicial, and Ajai Das Mehrotra, Member Technical, stated that the impugned order suffered from illegality and therefore needed to be set aside.

Matter to Be Heard on Merits After Compliance​

While refraining from expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the appellate tribunal directed the NCLT to allow Culver Max to cure defects related to authorisation. Once the deficiencies are rectified, the matter is to be heard on merits.

The NCLAT further stated that this exercise should preferably be completed within two months, as per its order dated December 10, 2025.

Background of the Dispute​

On April 30, 2024, the NCLT had dismissed a Section 9 insolvency application filed by Culver Max Entertainment against Rechargekit Fintech. The petition was rejected on the ground that no board resolution was placed on record to ratify the initiation of insolvency proceedings.

Culver Max challenged this decision before the appellate tribunal, arguing that the NCLT should have granted time to submit a fresh board resolution or authorisation, as permitted under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

Interpretation of Section 9 of IBC​

The NCLAT agreed with Culver Max’s submission, pointing out that under Section 9(5)(ii) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, the adjudicating authority has the power to reject an incomplete application but must first issue a notice to the applicant, allowing defects to be rectified within seven days.

The tribunal reiterated that it was the duty of the NCLT to put the applicant on notice and allow rectification, a step that was admittedly skipped in this case.