# In the matter of Apresh Garg vs. Indian Bank (erstwhile Allahabad Bank) & Anr.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2024-03-05. Citation: TCN-2024-NCLAT-00595. The appeal is against an order dated 30.01.2024 passed by the Adjudicating Authority…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 5 Mar 2024
- **Citation:** TCN-2024-NCLAT-00595
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/apresh-garg-vs-indian-bank-b2cf4834

## Summary

### Background

The appeal is against an order dated 30.01.2024 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal) New Delhi Bench (Court-II), which admitted a Section 7 application filed by Indian Bank. The appellant, Apresh Garg, had been extended a loan facility by a consortium of banks through a joint consortium agreement executed on 25.10.2017. Indian Overseas Bank is the lead bank in the consortium, which comprises 11 banks, including Indian Bank. Indian Bank's share in the total lending to the Corporate Debtor is 2.47%. The Corporate Debtor is a going concern and had submitted a debt restructuring plan to the lead bank. While most banks in the consortium were considering the restructuring proposal, Indian Bank filed the Section 7 application claiming Rs.

…

## Facts

Apresh Garg, the appellant, received a loan from a consortium of banks, with Indian Overseas Bank as the lead bank, under an agreement dated 25.10.2017. Indian Bank, holding a 2.47% share in the lending, filed a Section 7 application claiming Rs. 51,07,40,896/- due as of 10.08.2023. The Corporate Debtor proposed a debt restructuring plan. While most banks considered the plan, Indian Bank initiated insolvency proceedings. Lenders considered assigning the debt to NARCL, and the Delhi High Court ordered a review of the Corporate Debtor's credit rating. The Adjudicating Authority admitted the Section 7 application on 30.01.2024, leading to the appeal. 93% of the lenders agreed in principle to restructure the debt. The lenders also agreed to assign the debt to NARCL. The

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority was justified in admitting the Section 7 application filed by …

**Ratio:** The principle is that the primary objective of the IBC is to revive and reorganize the

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that when a majority of lenders, holding more than 90% of the debt,

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation is that the Adjudicating Authority should consider the

…

**Application:** In this case, the court applied the principle by questioning the necessity of

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Barun M…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Apresh…
- **Respondents:** Agson Global Pvt.…; Indian Bank…

## Timeline

- **2017-10-25 — Loan Agre…**: Loan facility extended to the Appellant by a consortium of banks through a joint…
- **2023-08-10 — Section 7 App…**: Indian Bank filed Section 7…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 7 — Initiation of corporate insolvency resolution…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-7)

---

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/nclat-new-delhi/apresh-garg-vs-indian-bank-b2cf4834