Gaurav Jaina vs Bank Of India & Anr
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 401 of 2020
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The pendency of a civil suit between the parties concerning the same transaction does not, by itself, furnish a ground to reject an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, where the financial creditor establishes that a debt is due and the default is not disputed.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Bank of India & Anr. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal and Mr. Gaurav Choudhary, Advocates
ORDER
12.03.2020 'Bank of India' filed an application under Section 7 of the 'I&B
Code' pursuant to which Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law
Tribunal), Guwahati Bench by impugned order dated 12th February, 2020
initiated 'corporate insolvency resolution process' against 'M/s. Agnipa Energy
Private Limited' (Corporate Debtor).
Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that there is a suit pending
inter se the parties and admission of application under Section 7 of the 'I&B
Code' would result in pre-empting the decision pending in the suit. It was further
submitted that because of the failure on the part of the Bank wrong insurance
policy was taken which resulted in the Corporate Debtor's taking advantage of
the same and because of this dispute pending, the Adjudicating Authority
admitted the application under Section 7.
It is not disputed that there is a 'debt' payable by the Corporate Debtor to
the Bank as loan having taken, the default has not been disputed and there is
ground for rejection of the application under Section 7 of the I&B Code. -2-
In the circumstances, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned
order dated 12th February, 2020. The appeal is dismissed. No costs.
[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson
[ Justice Bansi Lal Bhat ] Member (Judicial)
[ Shreesha Merla ] Member (Technical)
/ns/gc/
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 401 of 2020
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free