# In the matter of Gouri Prasad Goenka vs. State Bank of India & Ors.

> HC judgment dated 2024-03-20. Citation: TCN-2024-HC-00113. The writ petition was filed against an order by the Review Committee (RC) of the respondent bank,…

- **Court:** HC
- **Order date:** 20 Mar 2024
- **Citation:** TCN-2024-HC-00113
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/high-courts-new-delhi/gouri-prasad-goenka-vs-state-bank-of-india-ors-2a2767fb

## Summary

### Background

The writ petition was filed against an order by the Review Committee (RC) of the respondent bank, affirming the declaration of the petitioner as a Wilful Defaulter. The petitioner, a director of Duncans Industries Limited, argued that the company had approached the bank for a One Time Settlement (OTS) and was undergoing a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016. The petitioner contended that the RC mechanically repeated the decision of the Wilful Defaulters Identification Committee without independent findings and that the company suffered huge losses during the relevant financial years. The bank argued that the petitioner had diverted funds, failed to route sales proceeds through the designated account, and

…

## Facts

Gouri Prasad Goenka, the petitioner and a director of Duncans Industries Limited, filed a writ petition against State Bank of India & Ors., challenging the Review Committee's (RC) order affirming his declaration as a wilful defaulter. Duncans Industries Limited had approached the bank for a One Time Settlement (OTS), but before the last extended period expired, the company underwent a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016. The petitioner argued that the RC mechanically repeated the decision of the Wilful Defaulters Identification Committee without independent findings. The company suffered losses from 2014-15 to 2018-19, and the committees failed to consider these losses. The bank alleged that the

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Review Committee (RC) mechanically repeated the decision of the Wilful Defaulters …

**Ratio:** The appellate authority is not required to give separate reasons if it agrees with the

…

**Reasoning:** The court found that the RC did take into account the relevant factors and rendered its

…

**Interpretation:** This issue concerns the procedural fairness and independence of the Review

…

**Application:** In this case, the court found that the RC had indeed considered the relevant

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** SABYASACHI…
- **Appellants:** Gouri Prasad…
- **Respondents:** Duncans Industries…; State Bank of…
- **Other parties:** Kohi…

## Timeline

- **2004-01-01 — Agreement with Third…**: The borrower-Company had entered into…
- **2013-07-01 — Renewal of Ag…**: The contract with third parties was…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 2(60) — Application](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-2)

---

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-new-delhi/gouri-prasad-goenka-vs-state-bank-of-india-ors-2a2767fb