# In the matter of Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. Vs. K. Bharathi & Ors., W.P.No.12957 of 2021

> HC judgment dated 2021-08-05. Citation: TCN-2021-HC-00019. The writ petition was filed against an order dated March 26, 2021, passed by the National Company…

- **Court:** HC
- **Order date:** 5 Aug 2021
- **Citation:** TCN-2021-HC-00019
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/high-courts-chandigarh-bench/kotak-mahindra-bank-ltd-vs-k-bharathi-ors-wpno12957-of-2021-7a5c30b0

## Summary

### Background

The writ petition was filed against an order dated March 26, 2021, passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Chennai. The petitioner claims to be a financial creditor of the corporate debtor in the NCLT proceedings. A dispute exists between the petitioner and the first respondent, who is allegedly the mother-in-law of the sixth respondent and the principal promoter and human agency in control of the second respondent corporate debtor. An appeal has been preferred by the first respondent against an order of a Single Bench, including observations made therein. The NCLT has adjourned the matter until August 26, 2021.

## Facts

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. filed a writ petition against K.Bharathi and others, including Green Gardens Private Limited and Gemini Arts Private Limited. The petitioner claims to be a financial creditor of a corporate debtor in NCLT proceedings. There is a dispute between the petitioner and the first respondent, K.Bharathi, who is allegedly the mother-in-law of the sixth respondent, A.Manohar Prasad, and the principal promoter and human agency in control of the second respondent corporate debtor, Green Gardens Private Limited. The petitioner sought a direction to the NCLT to dispose of an application filed by the petitioner. The NCLT adjourned the matter until August 26, 2021, pending the disposal of an appeal against an order of a Single Bench. The NCLT sought direction

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the NCLT was justified in seeking direction from the High Court regarding whether the …

**Ratio:** The NCLT is expected to function within its authority and adhere to the limits of

…

**Reasoning:** The court found that the NCLT's action was an attempt to pass the buck and was

…

**Interpretation:** The court interpreted the NCLT's action as a failure to exercise its own

…

**Application:** The court applied the ratio to the facts of the case, finding that the NCLT was

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Sanjib Ba…; MR.JUSTICE…
- **Appellants:** M/s.Kotak…
- **Respondents:** Green Gardens…; K. Bhar…

## Timeline

- **2021-03-26 — NCLT Ord…**: The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Chennai, passed an order which is the subject…
- **2021-08-26 — NCLT Adjou…**: The NCLT adjourned the matter until August 26, 2021, pending the disposal of an appeal…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 60(5) — Adjudicating Authority for corporate persons](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-60)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/high-courts-chandigarh-bench/kotak-mahindra-bank-ltd-vs-k-bharathi-ors-wpno12957-of-2021-7a5c30b0