NSECorporate Insolvency Resolution Process1d ago · 4 Sept 2026, 04:37 pm
Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process
Talwalkars Better Value Fitness Limited · TALWALKARS
✦ AI SummaryInsolvency
Talwalkars Better Value Fitness Limited has been informed about a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process- Order dated 3rd September 2026, passed by the Hon'ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principle Bench, New Delhi. The order relates to the liquidation proceedings of the company and the appointment of a liquidator.
Analysis Scores
Earnings Impact1/10
Growth Catalyst1/10
Governance Concern5/10
Regulatory Risk8/10
Balance Sheet Risk9/10
Liquidity Impact1/10
Market Sentiment2/10
✦ Ask a Question
Ask anything about this announcement — AI will answer based on the filing content.
Full Announcement
Talwalkars Better Value Fitness Limited has informed the Exchange about Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process- Order dated 3rd September 2026, passed by the Hon ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principle Bench, New Delhi
Attachments (1)
📄pdf
Download →
TALWALKARS1_04092026163659_NCLT_Order_Update-_Regulation_30.pdf
View document text
TALWALKARS BETTER VALUE FITNESS LIMITED
CIN: L92411MH2003PLC140134
Registered Office: 1702, 17th Floor, Signature (By Lotus), Off Veera Desai Road Extn., Andheri West, Andheri,
Mumbai, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India, 400053
✉ talwalkarbetter@gmail.com |📞 +91 98199 44575 |🌐 talwalkarsfitness.com
Date: 04-09-2026
To, To,
Manager– CRD The Manager – Listing
BSE Limited National Stock Exchange of India Limited
Phiroze Jeejeebhoy Towers, Exchange Plaza, Bandra Kurla Complex,
Dalal Street, Fort, Mumbai - 400 001. Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.
Scrip Code: 533200 SYMBOL: TALWALKARS
Dear Sir/Madam,
Subject: Disclosure under Regulation 30 – Liquidation Updates– Talwalkars Better Value Fitness
Limited (“the Company”)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to Regulation 30 read with Part A of Schedule III of the SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure
Requirements) Regulations, 2015, we hereby submit the Order dated 3rd September 2026, passed by the
Hon’ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principle Bench, New Delhi as “Annexure-1”.
Kindly take the same on your records and acknowledge the receipt.
Thanking you,
For, Talwalkars Better Value Fitness Limited
Meena Arvind Bhanushali
Managing Director
DIN: 10816424
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 710 of 2026
[Arising out of the Impugned Order dated 26.02.2026 passed by the
Adjudicating Authority, National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai
Bench-IV in I.A. No. 840 of 2025 in C.P.(IB) No. 1056/MB/2020]
IN THE MATTER OF:
RAVIKUMAR GAURISHANKAR PATEL
through authorised attorney
Sumit Rajnikant Mehta
Indian Inhabitant, Residing AT 303,
Aagam Flats, Near Sharda Mandir School,
Paldi, Ahmedabad, Gujarat-380007
Email-Yahya.b23@gmail.com …Appellant
Versus
GAJESH LABHCHAND JAIN
Liquidator of Talwalkars Better Value Fitness
Limited
C-602, Remi Biz Court, Off Veera Desai road,
Azad Nagar, Andheri West, Mumbai- 400053
Email: liquidation.tbvfl@gmail.com …Respondent
Present:
For Appellant : Mr. Abhijeet Sinha, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Saikat
Sarkar, Ms. Meghna Rao, Mr. Yahya Batatawala,
Ms. Shreya Pandey, Mr. Abhishek Base, Advocates.
For : Mr. Ramakant Rai, Mr. Mohit Rohatgi, Mr. Ravin
Respondents Kapur, Mr. Karan Trehan, Ms. Nida Basade,
Advocates.
J U D G M E N T
(Hybrid Mode)
Per: Barun Mitra, Member (Technical)
The present appeal filed under Section 61 of the Insolvency
and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (‘IBC’ in short) by the Appellant arises
out of the Order dated 26.02.2026 (hereinafter referred to as the
‘Impugned Order’) passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National
Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench-IV) in I.A. No. 840 of 2025
filed in C.P.(IB) No. 1056/MB/2020. By the said impugned order,
the Adjudicating Authority has rejected/partly allowed certain
reliefs and concessions prayed for in the above application filed by
the present Appellant. Being aggrieved by the impugned order, the
Appellant has come up in appeal.
2. Coming to the brief facts of this case, the Corporate Debtor-
Talwalkars Better Value Fitness Ltd. was admitted into Corporate
Insolvency Resolution Process (‘CIRP’ in short) on 11.01.2021.
Since the CIRP process could not succeed, the Corporate Debtor
was subjected to liquidation proceedings under Section 33(2) of the
IBC by the Adjudicating Authority on 28.04.2022 following which
the Respondent-Liquidator was appointed. The Liquidator issued
e-auction sale notice for sale of the Corporate Debtor as a going
concern on 15.07.2024 in accordance with Regulation 32(e) of the
Liquidation Process Regulations. A Process Memorandum was also
issued by the Liquidator on 15.07.2024 which outlined the terms
and conditions for participation in the auction process. The e-
auction was conducted on 16.08.2024 and upon successful
participation in the said e-auction, the present Appellant emerged
Page 2 of 57
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 710 of 2026
as the Successful Auction Purchaser with a bid price of Rs. 15 Cr.
The Liquidator issued a Letter of Intent (‘LoI’ in short) on
17.08.2024 to the Appellant following which the Appellant paid the
entire sale consideration and was issued a Sale Certificate dated
23.01.2025. The Appellant thereafter filed I.A No. 840 of 2025
before the Adjudicating Authority seeking necessary and
consequential reliefs and concessions from the Adjudicating
Authority to operationalize the Corporate Debtor as a going
concern. The Adjudicating Authority passed the impugned order
on 26.02.2026 by which it rejected/ partly allowed certain reliefs
and concessions by holding that such reliefs sought were beyond
its jurisdiction and directed the Appellant to approach Regulatory
Authority such as SEBI and Stock Exchanges. Aggrieved by the
impugned order, the present appeal has been preferred by the
Successful Auction Purchaser-Appellant.
3. Making submissions on behalf of the Appellant, Shri Abhijeet
Sinha, Ld. Sr. Counsel submitted that it was imperative on the
part of the Appellant to approach the Adjudicating Authority for
seeking certain reliefs and concessions with a view to facilitate the
transfer of ownership of the Corporate Debtor to the Successful
Auction Purchaser so that the business of the Corporate Debtor
Page 3 of 57
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 710 of 2026
could be smoothly run. Giving a snapshot of the reliefs and
concessions urged, it was submitted that these reliefs/concessions
primarily centred around waiver of procedural requirements under
Companies Act for extinguishment/ cancellation of existing shares
without further payment; issue and allotment of new shares;
listing of new equity shares with Bombay Stock Exchange (‘BSE’ in
short) and National Stock Exchange (‘NSE’ in short) without the
necessitating the compliance of certain SEBI Regulations;
suspension/withdrawal of de-listing process or trading initiated by
the Stock Exchanges and enable listing and trading of new equity
shares; and change of the status of the Corporate Debtor company
on the MCA portal to “active” category besides waiver of past
liabilities of the Corporate Debtor prior to liquidation.
4. Submission was pressed that the above reliefs and
concessions which had been sought were not only bonafide but
necessary to engender effective implementation of the sale of the
Corporate Debtor as a going concern. It was submitted that sale as
a going concern was not a mere transfer of asset but constituted
in essence a transfer of a running business which required
continuity as well as legal recognition which was not possible in
the absence of appropriate reliefs, concessions and directions from
Page 4 of 57
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 710 of 2026
the Adjudicating Authority. It was emphatically asserted that the
Adjudicating Authority had erred in refusing to grant such
consequential and necessary reliefs sought for by the Appellant
even though the Adjudicating Authority was clothed with adequate
jurisdiction under Section 60(5) of the IBC to grant all
consequential and incidental reliefs necessary to implement a
going concern sale under liquidation. It was submitted by the
Appellant that they had not sought any relief which was beyond
the statutory framework but only sought directions which were
essential to pave the way for full and effective implementation of
the sale of the Corporate Debtor as a going concern. It was
vehemently asserted that several judgments had been passed by
various coordinate benches of the NCLT granting similar
reliefs/concessions while denial of similar permission by the
Adjudicating Authority in the present case would render the
implementation of the sale of the Corporate Debtor as a going
concern impracticable and hinder the revival process of the
Corporate Debtor which would militate against the objectives of
the IBC.
5. Elaborating further it was stressed that the “clean slate
theory” which has been
[Showing first 8,000 characters — download PDF for full document]