# In the matter of Mr. Amar Vora Vs. City Union Bank Ltd. & Anr. Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 130 of 2022

> NCLAT judgment dated 2022-05-11. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLAT-00487. The appeal was filed against the order dated 21.03.2022 passed by the National Company Law…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 11 May 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLAT-00487
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/mr-amar-vora-vs-city-union-bank-ltd-anr-company-appeal-a60ecc41

## Summary

### Background

The appeal was filed against the order dated 21.03.2022 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Division Bench-I, Chennai, which admitted an application filed by the Respondent/Financial Creditor under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016. The Appellant argued that the NCLT did not consider factual and legal positions, that the Appellant had obtained credit facilities from the Respondent Bank, and that the Respondent had initiated proceedings under Section 7 of the IBC while other proceedings were pending.

## Facts

Mr. Amar Vora, the Appellant, filed an appeal against an order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Chennai, which admitted an application filed by City Union Bank Ltd., the Respondent/Financial Creditor, under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016. The Appellant had obtained three credit facilities from the Respondent Bank for Rs. 5,20,00,000/- by offering property as collateral. The Respondent Bank initiated proceedings under Section 7 of the IBC, alleging certain defaults. The Appellant argued that the Respondent Bank had earlier issued a demand notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, for a default of Rs. 14,14,61,066/- and that an application was pending before the DRT Madurai for recovery of debts. The Appellant

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the pendency of proceedings under SARFAESI ACT, DRT and before PBPT, prohibits the …

**Ratio:** Section 238 of the I&B Code, 2016, provides that the provisions of the Code shall

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal reasoned that the IBC is a special enactment that consolidates and amends

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation is that the IBC has an overriding effect over other laws,

…

**Application:** The Tribunal applied this principle to the case, stating that the financial

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** M. Venu…; Kanthi Na…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Amar…
- **Respondents:** Milan Textiles…; City Union Bank…
- **Advocates:** Tamizh…; T. Lajapat…; +2 more

## Timeline

- **2022-03-21 — Order by…**: Order passed by National Company Law Tribunal, Division Bench - I, Chennai Bench in…
- **2018-08-30 — Demand Notice under…**: Demand notice issued to the Appellant under Section 13 (2) of SARFAESI ACT, 2002 for a…

---

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/mr-amar-vora-vs-city-union-bank-ltd-anr-company-appeal-a60ecc41