# In the matter of Ramesh Kumar Chugh vs. Assets Care & Construction Enterprises Limited

> NCLAT judgment dated 2024-10-15. Citation: TCN-2024-NCLAT-00160. The appeal arises from an order dated 03.07.2024 passed by the Adjudicating Authority…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 15 Oct 2024
- **Citation:** TCN-2024-NCLAT-00160
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/ramesh-kumar-chugh-vs-assets-care-construction-enterprises-limited-a2e3ab5a

## Summary

### Background

The appeal arises from an order dated 03.07.2024 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench-VI) in I.A. No. 317/2024 in C.P. (IB) No. 10/ND/2024, which dismissed I.A. No 317 of 2024 filed by the Appellant seeking restraint on the Respondent in the conduct of auction of sale notices dated 15.12.2023 under SARFAESI Act. The appellant, Ramesh Kumar Chugh, is a personal guarantor for a debt owed by M/s Sahil Home Loomtex Pvt. Ltd. A Section 95 petition under the IBC was filed against him by White Line Enterprises. The respondent, Assets Care & Construction Enterprises Ltd. (ACRE), initiated SARFAESI proceedings to recover debts owed by M/s Sheena Exports and M/s Sheena Textile Ltd., for which the appellant was a guarantor. The

…

## Facts

Ramesh Kumar Chugh (RKC), the Appellant, is a partner in M/s Sheena Exports and a guarantor for loan facilities availed by M/s Sheena Exports and M/s Sheena Textile Ltd. (STL) from various banks. These loans were later assigned to Assets Care & Construction Enterprises Ltd. (ACRE), the Respondent. Due to non-repayment of debt, ACRE initiated auction proceedings under the SARFAESI Act against properties of M/s Sheena Exports and STL. RKC is also a personal guarantor for the operational debt owed by M/s Sahil Home Loomtex Pvt. Ltd. to White Line Enterprises, which led to the filing of a Section 95 petition under the IBC against RKC. RKC then filed an application before the Adjudicating Authority to restrain ACRE from proceeding with the auction, arguing that the

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the interim moratorium under Section 96 of the IBC, triggered by a Section 95 petition …

**Ratio:** The interim moratorium under Section 96 of the IBC operates in respect of the debt for

…

**Reasoning:** The court relied on the judgment in Dilip B. Jiwrajka Versus Union of India, which

…

**Interpretation:** Section 96 of the IBC is interpreted to provide a moratorium that is limited to

…

**Application:** In this case, the Section 95 petition was filed against the Appellant in his

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Barun M…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Ramesh Kuma…
- **Respondents:** Assets Care &…

## Timeline

- **2023-12-15 — Sale Notices…**: Sale notices were issued for the auction of properties in respect of M/s Sheena Exports…
- **2023-12-22 — Section 95 Petition…**: A Section 95 petition was filed against…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 61 — Appeals and Appellate Authority](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-61)

---

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/ramesh-kumar-chugh-vs-assets-care-construction-enterprises-limited-a2e3ab5a