Nirmal Ujjwal Credit Co‑operative Society Ltd. v. Ravi Sethia 2026 INSC 338 - Multi‑State Cooperative Societies Act

Case Information Extracted

Case name and neutral citation:M/s Nirmal Ujjwal Credit Co‑operative Society Ltd. v. Ravi Sethia & Ors., 2026 INSC 338.

Coram (Bench):Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K.V. Viswanathan.

Judgment date:9 April 2026 (New Delhi).

Statutes / Laws Referred

The judgment primarily refers to:

• Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC)
• • Section 25(2)(h) – duties of resolution professional (invitation for EOI).
  • Section 29A – eligibility of resolution applicants (mentioned in Registrar’s note).
  • Section 30(2)(e) – resolution plan not to contravene any law for the time being in force.
  • Definition in Section 5(25) – “resolution applicant” (discussed by respondent).
• Multi‑State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002 (MSCS Act / 2002 Act)
• • Section 10(2) – matters to be provided in bye‑laws, including objects.
  • Section 11 – amendment of bye‑laws (and certificate of compliance).
  • Section 19 – “subsidiary institution” (referred to via JPC extract).
  • Section 64 (especially clause (d) and (f)) – investment of funds by MSCS, including the 2023 amendment inserting the words “any other institution in the same line of business as the multi‑State co‑operative society”.
• Indian Trusts Act, 1882
• • Section 20 – specified securities for investment (appears in old clause 52 of bye‑laws).
• Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
• • Order XLI Rule 27 – additional evidence at appellate stage (for late production of amended bye‑laws certificate).
• Regulations and Circulars
• • IBBI (CIRP) Regulations, 2016 – Regulation 36A(9) (seeking constitutional documents from PRAs).
  • SEBI (Delisting of Equity Shares) Regulations, 2021 – referred to for the expression “same line of business” and use of NIC codes (via SEBI Circular dated 06.07.2021).

Case Law / Authorities Cited

The text you provided does not reproduce the names of any other Supreme Court or High Court decisions as precedents in this judgment. The “authorities” the Court mainly relies on are:

• The Joint Parliamentary Committee Report dated 15.03.2023 on the MSCS (Amendment) Bill, 2022/2023 (quoted at length to explain the purpose and scope of the phrase “any other institution in the same line of business”).
• A SEBI Circular dated 06.07.2021 on the meaning of “same line of business” in the delisting context and use of NIC codes (treated only as illustrative guidance, not binding).

No specific case names or law‑report citations to earlier judgments appear in the extracted text, so there are no traditional “case citations” to list from what is visible.

Three‑Sentence Brief Summary

This appeal arose from the rejection of a resolution plan submitted by a multi‑state credit co‑operative society in the CIRP of Morarji Textiles Ltd., on the ground that the society’s bye‑laws and Section 64(d) of the MSCS Act did not permit such an investment. The Supreme Court clarified the law, holding that under Section 64(d) an MSCS can invest in another entity only if it is a subsidiary or an institution “in the same line of business” as defined by the society’s own objects and functions in its bye‑laws, and that this expression is a restrictive standard meant to prevent diversion of members’ funds into unrelated ventures. Applying this standard, the Court agreed that the appellant’s primary line of business is financial and member‑oriented, and not the industrial man‑made fibre/viscose business of the corporate debtor, but ultimately allowed the appellant to withdraw the appeal and left the CIRP to continue under the IBC.