# In the matter of Ashish Mohan Gupta vs. Union Bank of India

> NCLAT judgment dated 2024-05-31. Citation: TCN-2024-NCLAT-00390. The case involves an appeal against orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 31 May 2024
- **Citation:** TCN-2024-NCLAT-00390
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/ashish-mohan-gupta-vs-union-bank-of-india-59c74a5f

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Chandigarh Bench, dismissing an application filed under Section 94 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) for non-prosecution and subsequently rejecting a restoration application. The appellant, Ashish Mohan Gupta, is the personal guarantor of the Corporate Debtor. The Union Bank of India, the respondent, had initiated proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, leading to e-auction notices for secured assets. The appellant's counsel failed to appear on the initial hearing date due to a family bereavement, leading to the dismissal. A restoration application was filed, but it was also rejected. The Adjudicating Authority also considered the appellant's prior

…

## Facts

Ashish Mohan Gupta, the personal guarantor of a Corporate Debtor, filed an application under Section 94 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) with the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Chandigarh Bench. The Union Bank of India, the respondent, had initiated proceedings under the SARFAESI Act against the Corporate Debtor. The Section 94 application was dismissed for non-prosecution on 01.05.2024 because the appellant's counsel, Shri Karan Gaba, could not appear due to a family bereavement, which he communicated via email to the Registrar on 30.04.2024. A restoration application was filed on the same day, explaining the counsel's absence. The NCLT rejected the restoration application on 22.05.2024, citing the lack of specific details regarding the deceased's

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority was justified in dismissing the Section 94 application for …

**Ratio:** The principle of 'sufficient cause' as interpreted by the Supreme Court requires a

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLAT noted that the Adjudicating Authority dismissed the application because no one

…

**Interpretation:** The term 'sufficient cause' should be interpreted broadly to encompass

…

**Application:** In this case, the appellant's counsel's inability to appear due to a family

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Arun Ba…
- **Appellants:** Ashish Moha…
- **Respondents:** Union Bank of…

## Timeline

- **2024-02-27 — Filing of Section 94…**: The Appellant filed an…
- **2024-02-28 — Physical Copy of…**: The physical copy of the…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 94 — Application by debtor to initiate insolvency…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-94)

---

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/ashish-mohan-gupta-vs-union-bank-of-india-59c74a5f