# In the matter of Sunil Kumar Sharma vs. ICICI Bank Ltd & Anr.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2024-06-10. Citation: TCN-2024-NCLAT-00381. The case involves an appeal against the admission of a petition under Section 7 of the…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 10 Jun 2024
- **Citation:** TCN-2024-NCLAT-00381
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/sunil-kumar-sharma-vs-icici-bank-ltd-anr-1be941ea

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against the admission of a petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) against Jaiprakash Associates Ltd (JAL). The appellant proposed a One Time Settlement (OTS) to repay debts, categorized into three buckets. Bucket 1 involved repaying Rs. 11689 crores through the sale of plants to Ultratech Cement Ltd, which was completed in 2017. Bucket 2a consisted of a debt of Rs. 6367 crores to continue on new terms as per a MRA dated 31.10.2017. Bucket 2b consisted of a debt of Rs. 13,590 crores. A writ petition was filed in the Supreme Court, and the RBI was allowed to initiate proceedings based on the Independent Advisory Committee's recommendations. ICICI Bank initially stated no need for JAL to be referred to NCLT/IBC,

…

## Facts

Sunil Kumar Sharma, representing the suspended board of directors of Jaiprakash Associates Ltd (JAL), filed an appeal against the admission of a petition under Section 7 of the IBC. ICICI Bank Ltd & Anr are the respondents. The debt was structured into three buckets: Bucket 1, consisting of Rs. 11689 crores, was repaid through the sale of plants to Ultratech Cement Ltd in 2017. Bucket 2a, consisting of Rs. 6367 crores, was to continue on new terms as per a MRA dated 31.10.2017. Bucket 2b, consisting of Rs. 13,590 crores, is the subject of contention. A writ petition was filed in the Supreme Court, leading to the RBI being allowed to initiate proceedings based on the Independent Advisory Committee's recommendations. ICICI Bank initially stated that there was no need

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the NCLT was correct in admitting the petition under Section 7 of the IBC against …

**Ratio:** Section 7 of the IBC allows financial creditors to initiate corporate insolvency

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLT admitted the petition based on the default in debt repayment by Jaiprakash

…

**Interpretation:** Section 7 of the IBC provides a mechanism for financial creditors to recover

…

**Application:** The NCLT applied Section 7 of the IBC to the facts of the case, considering the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Yogesh K…; Barun M…
- **Appellants:** Sunil Kumar…
- **Respondents:** Jaiprakash…; ICICI Ban…
- **Advocates:** Sandeep…; Abhishek…; +10 more

## Timeline

- **2017-07-01 — CRRP Envi…**: CRRP envisaged entire debt…
- **2017-11-20 — 1st Motion…**: The 1st motion was…

---

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/sunil-kumar-sharma-vs-icici-bank-ltd-anr-1be941ea