Gulam Mustafa Enterprises Pvt Ltd vs India Housing Fund

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1693 Kant
Judgement Date : 23 February, 2026

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Gulam Mustafa Enterprises Pvt Ltd vs India Housing Fund on 23 February, 2026

Author: B M Shyam Prasad
Bench: B M Shyam Prasad
                                        -1-
                                                  NC: 2026:KHC:11067
                                                 WP No. 6071 of 2026


             HC-KAR



            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                 DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

                                  BEFORE

                 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

                  WRIT PETITION NO. 6071 OF 2026 (GM-RES)

            BETWEEN:

            GULAM MUSTAFA
            ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,
            A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
            THE PROVISION OF THE
            COMPANIES ACT
            HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT
            NO.6, G M PEARL, I STAGE,
            I PHASE, BTM LAYOUT
            BENGALURU - 560 068
            REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR AND
Digitally
signed by   AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY
VANAMALA    SRI GULAM MUSTAFA
N
Location:
HIGH                                             ...PETITIONER
COURT OF
KARNATAKA   (BY SRI.G.L.VISHWANATH, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
                 SRI.ARJUN RAO., ADVOCATE)
            AND:

            1.    INDIA HOUSING FUND
                  A CATEGORY II ALTERNATIVE
                            -2-
                                        NC: 2026:KHC:11067
                                       WP No. 6071 of 2026


 HC-KAR



     INVESTMENT
     FUND INCORPORATED UNDER THE
     PROVISIONS OF SECURITIES AND
     EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA
     (ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENT FUND)
     REGULATIONS 2012
     HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
     360 ONE CENTRE, KAMALA
     MILLS COMPOUND
     SENAPATI BAPAT MARG
     LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI-400 013
     REPRESENTED HEREIN BY
     INVESTMENT MANGER
     360 ONE ALTERNATES ASSET
     MANAGEMENT LTD.


2.   INDIA HOUSING FUND SERIES II
     A CATEGORY II ALTERNATIVE
     INVESTMENT
     FUND INCORPORATED
     UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF
     SECURITIES AND
     EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA
     (ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENT FUND)
     REGULATIONS 2012
     HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
     360 ONE CENTRE,
     KAMALA MILLS COMPOUND
                            -3-
                                     NC: 2026:KHC:11067
                                    WP No. 6071 of 2026


HC-KAR



    SENAPATI BAPAT MARG,
    LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI - 400 013
    REPRESENTED HEREIN BY
    INVESTMENT MANAGER
    360 ONE ALTERNATES ASSET
    MANAGEMENT LTD.


                                 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.DHYAN CHINNAPPA, SENIOR ADVOCATE;
   SRI.PINAZ MEHTA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2)


     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE

226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET

ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 02.02.2026 PASSED BY THE

NCLT IN CP(IB) NO. 90/BB/2025 AT ANNEX-Q    AND

DIRECT THE LD. NCLT TO DISPOSE THE I.A.NO. 1088

OF 2025 FILED BY THE PETITIONER AT ANNEX-H

BEFORE PASSING ANY ORDERS ON ADMISSION IN

CP(IB) NO.90 OF 2025 AND ETC.


     THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY

HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS

UNDER:
                                    -4-
                                                 NC: 2026:KHC:11067
                                             WP No. 6071 of 2026


HC-KAR



CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

                        ORAL ORDER

The petitioner is a respondent with the National Company Law Tribunal, Bengaluru [for short, 'the Tribunal'] in CP(IB) No.90/BB/2025, and the petitioner's grievance is with the Tribunal observing that two pass overs are not permissible on the same day and the petition must be listed for orders. The Tribunal has listed the petition for orders tomorrow [24.02.2026].

2. Mr.G.L.Vishwanath, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, while inviting this Court's attention to the circumstances that precede the Tribunal's order as aforesaid, submits that the petitioner, who has negotiated settlement with another financial creditor in W.P.No.10869/2023, has pursued with the respondents for a settlement and as such filed an application in CP(IB) No.90/BB/2025 for directions by the Tribunal to the -5- NC: 2026:KHC:11067 WP No. 6071 of 2026 HC-KAR respondents to issue NOC without prejudice to their rights. The learned Senior Counsel submits that if the respondents could relent to issue NOC without prejudice, the consequences that could befall if at all there is an admission of the application could be avoided and that there could be a quicker settlement.

3. Sri Dyan Chinnappa, the learned Senior Counsel for the respondents, submits that his instructions are to place on record that the respondents are not convinced that there would be a negotiated settlement for issuance of NOC and that there must be just orders on the petitioner's request for such directions to issue NOC. This submission, in this Court's considered view, forecloses the possibilities of an order by this Court in the present proceedings and that any further orders in this regard must be by the Tribunal.

4. The next question is should the petitioner have another opportunity to argue in support of the -6- NC: 2026:KHC:11067 WP No. 6071 of 2026 HC-KAR application filed for NOC and as against the admission of the application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. When queried, Mr.Dhyan Chinnappa, without entering into a debate on whether there was due opportunity for the petitioner's representative on 02.02.2026, submits that this Court could dispose of the petition observing that the Tribunal could hear the learned counsel for the petitioner tomorrow [24.02.2026] and then proceed to pass orders.

5. Mr.G.L. Vishwanath is heard on this aspect. This Court is of the view that ends of justice will be served if the Tribunal's orders on the pending application are with another opportunity to the petitioner without giving room for the assertions to the contrary. As such, the petition stands disposed of requesting the Tribunal to extend an opportunity to the learned counsel for the petitioner to make submissions on the pending application and on -7- NC: 2026:KHC:11067 WP No. 6071 of 2026 HC-KAR admission over the next fifteen [15] days and then proceed to pass orders. It is needless to observe that this Court has not entered into the merits of any contentions that are pending with the Tribunal.

Sd/-

(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA List No.: 2 Sl No.: 22