Supreme Court judge Justice Pankaj Mithal on Monday expressed serious concern over the increasing caseload before insolvency forums, noting that more than 18,000 cases were pending across various benches.
Speaking at the Constitution Club of India in New Delhi during an event organised by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) Bar Association to mark 10 years of the tribunals, Justice Mithal described pendency as a continuing and serious systemic challenge.
He said that although growing public confidence in the tribunal mechanism has led to a surge in filings, statutory timelines under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) are often not being met due to complex litigation, repeated appellate interventions, infrastructural constraints, and persistent vacancies.
Justice Mithal stressed that institutional reform cannot be achieved merely through the creation of tribunals unless supported by adequate infrastructure, timely appointments, procedural discipline, and administrative stability. The focus must shift from creation to strengthening of institutions, adding that tribunals cannot function effectively without sustained structural support, he added.
The Supreme Court judge also flagged serious structural concerns in the functioning of the NCLT and NCLAT, stating that more than 80 per cent of their workforce comprised contractual employees. He cautioned that such heavy reliance on temporary staff was affecting institutional continuity and disrupting the functioning of India’s insolvency adjudication framework.
The completion of a decade of the tribunals should not be viewed merely as a ceremonial milestone, but as an occasion for introspection on whether insolvency and company law reforms have translated into improved justice delivery outcomes, noted the judge.
While acknowledging the central role of the NCLT and NCLAT in shaping India’s insolvency and company law jurisprudence under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), he said several structural and systemic challenges continue to persist despite the legislative objectives of the reform framework.
Justice Mithal also raised an institutional question on tribunalisation, observing that while insolvency and company law disputes now first go before the NCLT and NCLAT instead of High Courts, many significant matters continue to reach the Supreme Court. He questioned whether the system has truly reduced the burden on constitutional courts or merely altered the procedural route through which litigation travels.
On insolvency-related issues, the Apex Court judge highlighted continuing concerns in asset recovery and valuation. He noted that distressed assets are often assessed on the basis of immediate liquidation value rather than long-term enterprise value, while the limited availability of quality resolution applicants further affects value realisation.
To address these concerns, he suggested strengthening institutional support mechanisms for liquidators and registered valuers, including clearer operating procedures, improved audit frameworks, and systematic post-resolution review of valuations. He also said the feasibility of conducting revaluation of assets at defined intervals should be examined to improve accuracy and fairness in the resolution process.
Justice Mithal further underlined the need to expand structured mediation in commercial disputes. He stated that mediation conducted by professionals with legal and commercial expertise could enable faster, cost-effective resolution while reducing the burden on adjudicatory forums.
He also called for greater procedural uniformity across commercial tribunals, noting that varying procedural requirements and limitation periods for similar disputes create unnecessary complexity and uncertainty for litigants. Another key priority is the timely filling of vacancies, along with strengthening digital infrastructure through robust e-filing systems, integrated case management platforms, and improved administrative support across benches.
Justice Mithal cautioned against excessive interference in commercial matters, stating that while judicial scrutiny is essential, repeated interventions can undermine the finality of insolvency resolutions. He observed that the appellate structure must function as a guardian of legality rather than an alternative commercial adjudicatory forum.
He also urged greater attention to the interests of smaller stakeholders within the insolvency ecosystem, including MSMEs, workers, operational creditors, and homebuyers. He said the effectiveness of insolvency law cannot be assessed solely on the basis of large corporate resolutions, but must also consider whether ordinary stakeholders are able to access timely and meaningful relief.
Former Chief Justice of India Justice BR Gavai, Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal, NCLAT Chairperson Justice Ashok Bhushan, NCLT President Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal, former Supreme Court judge Justice Rajesh Bindal, along with members of the tribunals, senior advocates, insolvency professionals, bankers, and members of the Bar, attended the event.
The post Justice Pankaj Mithal expresses concern over pendency in insolvency forums appeared first on India Legal.