Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Shyam Sunder Bhatter vs Punjab National Bank & Anr

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal3 December 2018

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The text contains a reasoning fragment: the Tribunal holds that a guarantor is not a necessary party at the stage of admission of an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, and that because of this no relief can be granted to the appellants on their sole ground. The reasoning is partly garbled in the text, but the operative principle is that non-impleadment of a guarantor as a respondent at the admission stage under Section 7 is not a ground to set aside the admission order.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNALNEW DELHICompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 728 of 2018IN THE MATTER OF:Shyam Sunder Bhatter ...AppellantVersusPunjab National Bank & Anr. ...RespondentsCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 729 of 2018IN THE MATTER OF:

M/s. Rockside Impex Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant

Versus

Punjab National Bank & Anr. ...Respondents

Present:

For Appellant : Mr. T.P. Shami, Advocate

ORDER

03.12.2018 These appeals have been preferred by two guarantors namely

Mr. Shyam Sunder Bhatter, Guarantor of M/s. Dynamic Shells (India) Pvt. Ltd.

(Corporate Debtor) and another by M/s. Rockside Impex Pvt. Ltd. against the

common order dated 27th September, 2018 passed by the Adjudicating Authority

(National Company Law Tribunal) Principal Bench, New Delhi after delay of 15

days along with petition for condonation of delay. By the impugned order, the

Adjudicating Authority has admitted the application under Section 7 of the I&B 2

Code preferred by the 'Punjab National Bank' (Financial Creditor) against the

'Corporate Debtor' and initiated the 'corporate insolvency resolution process'.

The sole ground taken by the counsel for the appellants are is that the

guarantors were not impleaded as a party respondent to the 'corporate

insolvency resolution proceedings. However, he, as a guarantor, is not a

necessary party at the time of admission of an application under Section 7, no

relief can be granted.

In the circumstances, while we condone the delay of 15 days in preferring

both the appeals but in absence of any merit, dismissed the appeals. No cost.

[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson

[ Justice Bansi Lal Bhat ] Member (Judicial)

/ns/uk/

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 728 & 729 of 2018

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