" NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 1004 of 2025 IN THE MATTER OF: Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. …Appellants Versus Ramachandran Subramanian, Liquidator of Tecpro Systems Ltd. …Respondents Present: For Appellant : Mr. Arun Kathpalia Sr. Advocate with Ms. Misha, Ms. Moulshree Shukla, Mr. Aditya Dhupar and Mr. Prithviraj Oberoi, Advocates. For Respondents : Mr. Anirban Bhattacharya, Mr. Nipun Gautam and Mr. Rajeev Chowdhary, Advocates for Liquidator. O R D E R (Hybrid Mode) 15.07.2025: Heard Counsel for the appellant as well as Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondent no.1. 2. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 09.07.2025 passed by National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench, Court-II in IA No. 5798/ND/2024 as well as in IA No. 4269/ND/2024. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that IA No. 5798/2024 is IA where appellant who had 84.82% vote-share in the Stakeholder Consultation Committee has prayed for replacement of the liquidator which was voted under the orders of Adjudicating Authority. It is submitted that another application 4269/ND/2024 was filed by the liquidator seeking exclusion of the appellant from Stakeholder Consultation Committee on the ground that appellant is a 2 of 3 Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 1004 of 2025 related party to the CD which application is pending and has been directed to listed on 06.08.2025. It is submitted that unless the appellant is excluded from SCC no meeting can be directed without the appellant’s participation and now the Adjudicating Authority has directed to be holding the meeting on 15.07.2025 by Stakeholder Consultation Committee without appellant permitted to vote. 3. Ld. Counsel for the liquidator submits that meeting was directed in fact on the submissions of the appellant that even if voting of the appellant is excluded from earlier voting held on 18.10.2024 the liquidator shall stands removed. The meeting has been directed for today at 11:30 a.m. Liquidator is present. Liquidator submits that order have been received only yesterday and two days’ notice is required and meeting be called for 17.07.2025, at the same time. Counsel for the appellant submits that he should not be asked to bear the cost. The issue of the cost may be decided by the Adjudicating Authority subsequently. Let meeting take place however, the result of the meeting be neither announced nor made public and it should be kept in the seal cover which may be placed before the Adjudicating Authority on the next date. 4. We are of the view that both the applications 4269 & 5798 need to be decided by the Adjudicating Authority and outcome of the meeting, if any, can be implemented only after the decision of those applications. The matter has been fixed by 06.08.2025. 3 of 3 Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 1004 of 2025 5. We are of the view that Adjudicating Authority shall endeavour to dispose of these applications on the date fixed or as early as possible. With the above observations, appeal is disposed of. [Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson [Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) harleen/NN "