The case involves two appeals, Company Appeal (AT) Ins. No. 774 of 2022 and Company Appeal (AT) Ins. No. 781 of 2022, filed against orders passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Ahmedabad. The first appeal challenges an order dated July 19, 2021, where the NCLT initiated an interim moratorium and appointed a Resolution Professional (RP) based on an application filed by the State Bank of India under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) against the Appellant, who is a personal guarantor. The second appeal challenges an order dated August 17, 2021, which also directed the commencement of a moratorium and the appointment of the same RP. Both appeals raise similar questions of fact and law and are decided by a common judgment.
1. State Bank of India filed an application under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) against Rahul Arunprasad Patel, a personal guarantor, seeking to initiate the Insolvency Resolution Process.
2. The application was filed before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Ahmedabad.
3. The NCLT passed an order on July 19, 2021, directing the commencement of an interim moratorium and appointing Mr. Sunil Kumar Kabra as the Resolution Professional (RP).
4. A similar order was passed on August 17, 2021, in a related matter.
5. Rahul Arunprasad Patel filed Company Appeal (AT) Ins. No. 774 of 2022 challenging the order dated July 19, 2021.
6. The Appellant argued that the application was filed by the creditor (State Bank of India) and not by the RP,
Sign in to view the parties.
State Bank of India filed an application…
NCLT passed an order directing the commencement…
The case involves two appeals, Company Appeal (AT) Ins. No. 774 of 2022 and Company Appeal (AT) Ins. No. 781 of 2022, filed against orders passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Ahmedabad. The first appeal challenges an order dated July 19, 2021, where the NCLT initiated an interim moratorium and appointed a Resolution Professional (RP) based on an application filed by the State Bank of India under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) against the Appellant, who is a personal guarantor. The second appeal challenges an order dated August 17, 2021, which also directed the commencement of a moratorium and the appointment of the same RP. Both appeals raise similar questions of fact and law and are decided by a common judgment.
1. State Bank of India filed an application under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) against Rahul Arunprasad Patel, a personal guarantor, seeking to initiate the Insolvency Resolution Process.
2. The application was filed before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Ahmedabad.
3. The NCLT passed an order on July 19, 2021, directing the commencement of an interim moratorium and appointing Mr. Sunil Kumar Kabra as the Resolution Professional (RP).
4. A similar order was passed on August 17, 2021, in a related matter.
5. Rahul Arunprasad Patel filed Company Appeal (AT) Ins. No. 774 of 2022 challenging the order dated July 19, 2021.
6. The Appellant argued that the application was filed by the creditor (State Bank of India) and not by the RP,
State Bank of India filed an application…
NCLT passed an order directing the commencement…