# In the matter of Sandip Kumar Bajaj & Anr. Vs. State Bank of India & Anr.

> HC judgment dated 2020-09-15. Citation: TCN-2020-HC-00013. The case involves a challenge to a show cause notice issued by the State Bank of India (SBI) to the…

- **Court:** HC
- **Order date:** 15 Sept 2020
- **Citation:** TCN-2020-HC-00013
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/high-courts-chandigarh-bench/sandip-kumar-bajaj-anr-vs-state-bank-of-india-anr-6afde326

## Summary

### Background

The case involves a challenge to a show cause notice issued by the State Bank of India (SBI) to the petitioners, who are erstwhile promoters/directors of Mohan Motors Udyog Private Limited. The notice called upon the petitioners to explain why their names should not be included in the list of wilful defaulters according to RBI guidelines. The petitioners claim that the proceedings are in violation of Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) due to a moratorium in place following the commencement of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Mohan Motors Udyog Private Limited. The petitioners also argue that the show cause notice was not issued by a properly constituted committee as per RBI Master Circular on Wilful Defaulters, 2015.

## Facts

Sandip Kumar Bajaj and another (the petitioners) challenged a show cause notice issued by the State Bank of India (SBI) regarding their potential classification as wilful defaulters. The petitioners are the erstwhile promoters/directors of Mohan Motors Udyog Private Limited, which is undergoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The insolvency proceedings commenced on March 17, 2020, by an order of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Kolkata Bench, which also declared a moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The show cause notice, dated November 14, 2019, was followed by a notice for personal hearing dated August 6, 2020. The petitioners argued that the show cause notice was issued in violation of the moratorium

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC applies to proceedings against guarantors of a …

**Ratio:** Section 14(3)(b) of the IBC explicitly states that the moratorium does not apply to a

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the legislative intent behind Section 14(3)(b) is to allow

…

**Interpretation:** Section 14 of the IBC aims to protect the corporate debtor during the CIRP by

…

**Application:** In this case, the petitioners are erstwhile guarantors of Mohan Motors Udyog

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Moushumi Bhattacha…
- **Appellants:** Sandip Kuma…
- **Respondents:** Mohan Motors…; State Bank of…

## Timeline

- **2019-11-14 — Show Cause…**: State Bank of India issued a show cause notice to the petitioners regarding their…
- **2020-03-17 — CIRP Commen…**: Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) commenced against Mohan Motors Udyog…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 14 — Moratorium](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-14)

---

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/sandip-kumar-bajaj-anr-vs-state-bank-of-india-anr-6afde326