Suresh Kumar Jain vs Punjab National Bank Through Deepak ...
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1910 of 2025
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Appellate Tribunal may modify an order of the Adjudicating Authority rejecting a personal guarantor's application for rectification of his name under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, by permitting the name to be shown with the addition of "alias", where the creditor has no objection to that addition. A rectification or correction of a name made in proceedings under Section 95 operates only for the purposes of those proceedings and does not alter the identity or the rights and obligations recorded in the proceedings more generally.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Suresh Kumar Jain, (Personal Guarantor of Magppie ....Appellant International Ltd.) Vs. Vs.
Punjab National Bank & Anr. ...Respondents For Appellant Mr. Rishi Kapoor, Mr. Sumeet Kapoor, Advocates.
For Respondents Ms. Kavita, Advocate for R1 & R2
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
22.12.2025: I.A. No. 7393 of 2025:- This is an application praying for
condonation of 96 days delay in re-filing of the Appeal. Counsel for the
Applicant submits that the delay was caused on account of obtaining better
legible copies of the already legible annexures filed in the application. He
submits that the Registry has raised defects on more than one occasion.
2. We find sufficient cause for condonation of re-filing delay. Re-filing delay
application is allowed. There is no objection by the Respondent.
I.A. No. 7446 of 2025:- This is an application praying for condonation of 9
days' delay in filing the appeal.
2 2. We find sufficient cause shown in the application. There is no objection
by the Respondent. Delay is condoned.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1910 of 2025 :-
Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant as well as Counsel for the
Bank and Resolution Professional.
2. This Appeal has been filed against the order dated 30.06.2025 passed
by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal) New Delhi,
Court VI by which IA No.2934 of 2025 filed by the Appellant for rectification
of his name has been rejected.
3. Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Appellant's correct name is
Suresh Kumar Jain which is also shown in the Aadhaar as well as the said
name was shown in the Guarantee Deed and an application for correction has
been rejected.
4. Counsel for the Bank submits that the Bank has no objection if the
word 'alias' is added after Suresh Kumar Jain i.e. Suresh Kumar Jain alias
Suresh Chand Jain.
5. We are of the view that since the Bank has no objection by adding a
word alias against the name of Suresh Kumar Jain. For the present
proceeding under Section 95, we, thus, modify the order passed by the
Adjudicating Authority permitting the name of Suresh Kumar Jain be shown
as alias after Mr. Suresh Chand Jain. We however, make it clear that the said
rectification and correction in the name shall have no effect in the proceeding
which has been filed.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1910 of 2025 & I.A. No. 7393, 7446 of 2025 3
6. With these observations, we dispose of this appeal.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) Anjali/md
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1910 of 2025 & I.A. No. 7393, 7446 of 2025
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