A suspended director of Essel Infraprojects on Tuesday alleged before the Supreme Court of India that the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai, cited “non-existent” judgments while admitting the company into the insolvency process. Senior Advocate Madhavi Divan, appearing for Pooja Ramesh Singh, orally made an argument before the Bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Alok Aradhe that several decisions relied upon in the tribunal’s order appeared to be fabricated, with unverifiable names and excerpts. Taking note, the Bench remarked that the issue went to the very integrity of judicial proceedings and permitted the petitioner to place the disputed citations on record through an affidavit in a week. The challenge arises from a September 11, 2025 ruling of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, which affirmed the NCLT’s August 28, 2024 order starting the insolvency process against Essel Infraprojects on a plea by Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited. The insolvency proceedings stem from an alleged default of Rs 87.43 crore linked to a Rs 200 crore credit facility extended to Pan India Utilities Distribution Company Limited. The loan was backed by a corporate guarantee from Essel Infraprojects and a mortgage over land in Gorai, Borivali, Mumbai. Before the NCLT, Essel contended that its obligations had ceased following a court-approved restructuring in 2014, under which assets and liabilities were shifted to other group entities, including Essel Urban Infraprojects and subsequently Pan India Infraprojects. The tribunal, however, rejected this defence, holding that the corporate guarantee continued to bind the company. In reaching this conclusion, the NCLT Bench of Judicial Member Rita Kohli and Technical Member Madhu Sinha cited multiple Supreme Court rulings. According to the petitioner, Pooja Singh, most of these rulings, barring two, cannot be traced or verified. Notably, the appellate tribunal did not rely on these judgments but merely recorded that the NCLT had referred to them before dismissing the appeal. In September 2025, the apex court ordered status quo on the insolvency process. During the latest hearing, Divan sought time to formally place the discrepancies on affidavit, which the court allowed, while clarifying that the merits of the dispute would also be examined. The matter is slated for further hearing on May 12.