The petitioner, Vijay Kumar Ghai, challenged an order passed by the learned JMIC, Jalandhar, dated 25.05.2021, which dismissed his application seeking a stay on proceedings initiated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The petitioner argued that filing an application under Section 94 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), should automatically stay proceedings under Section 138, even if the cheque was issued in his personal capacity and not in discharge of any corporate debt. The respondent, Pritpal Singh Babbar, claimed the petitioner requested a loan of Rs.1,00,000 for business, later issuing a cheque for Rs.11,00,000 which was dishonored. The respondent issued a legal notice on 02.03.2012, and filed a complaint on 21.03.2012 when
…Vijay Kumar Ghai, the petitioner, is a personal guarantor for M/s Priknit Retails Limited, a company undergoing liquidation under Section 7 of the IBC. Pritpal Singh Babbar, the respondent, filed a complaint against Ghai under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, due to a dishonored cheque issued in 2012. The cheque was allegedly issued for repayment of a personal loan taken by Ghai from Babbar. Ghai filed an application under Section 94 of the IBC in December 2020, seeking initiation of an insolvency resolution process. The JMIC dismissed Ghai's application for a stay on the Section 138 proceedings, leading Ghai to file a petition in the High Court. The key facts are the personal loan, the dishonored cheque, the Section 138 complaint, the IBC
…Sign in to view the parties.
Respondent issued a legal notice to the…
Respondent filed a complaint against the…
The petitioner, Vijay Kumar Ghai, challenged an order passed by the learned JMIC, Jalandhar, dated 25.05.2021, which dismissed his application seeking a stay on proceedings initiated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The petitioner argued that filing an application under Section 94 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), should automatically stay proceedings under Section 138, even if the cheque was issued in his personal capacity and not in discharge of any corporate debt. The respondent, Pritpal Singh Babbar, claimed the petitioner requested a loan of Rs.1,00,000 for business, later issuing a cheque for Rs.11,00,000 which was dishonored. The respondent issued a legal notice on 02.03.2012, and filed a complaint on 21.03.2012 when
…Vijay Kumar Ghai, the petitioner, is a personal guarantor for M/s Priknit Retails Limited, a company undergoing liquidation under Section 7 of the IBC. Pritpal Singh Babbar, the respondent, filed a complaint against Ghai under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, due to a dishonored cheque issued in 2012. The cheque was allegedly issued for repayment of a personal loan taken by Ghai from Babbar. Ghai filed an application under Section 94 of the IBC in December 2020, seeking initiation of an insolvency resolution process. The JMIC dismissed Ghai's application for a stay on the Section 138 proceedings, leading Ghai to file a petition in the High Court. The key facts are the personal loan, the dishonored cheque, the Section 138 complaint, the IBC
…Respondent issued a legal notice to the…
Respondent filed a complaint against the…