# In the matter of Advance Sufactants India Limited Company Petitiion No. (IB)-922 (PB)-2018

> NCLT judgment dated 2019-05-28. Citation: TCN-2019-NCLT-03161. State Bank of India filed an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code,…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 28 May 2019
- **Citation:** TCN-2019-NCLT-03161
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-chandigarh/advance-sufactants-india-limited-company-petitiion-no-ib-922-pb-2018-60432842

## Summary

### Background

State Bank of India filed an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Advance Surfactants India Limited, referred to as the corporate debtor. The application was filed due to the corporate debtor's failure to repay outstanding dues. The applicant bank claimed a total default amount of Rs. 157,25,13,562.32 as of 22.07.2018, including principal and interest. The corporate debtor raised objections, arguing that the applicant had already filed a recovery application before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) and that there were disputed questions of fact. The applicant bank contended that the pendency of DRT proceedings was not a bar to initiating CIRP under Section 7 of

…

## Facts

State Bank of India (SBI) filed a petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Advance Surfactants India Limited, the Corporate Debtor. SBI claimed that the Corporate Debtor defaulted on loan repayments, with a total outstanding debt of Rs. 157,25,13,562.32 as of 22.07.2018, including principal and interest. SBI had sanctioned various credit facilities to the Corporate Debtor over time, including Cash Credit, Term Loans, and BG-RA. The Corporate Debtor had executed various loan and guarantee documents, including a Working Capital Consortium Agreement dated 13.02.2013. SBI, along with Yes Bank and IDBI Bank, formed a consortium that granted working capital facilities to the

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the pendency of recovery proceedings before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) bars the …

**Ratio:** The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, being a complete code and Union Law,

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal relied on Section 238 of the IBC and precedents set by the NCLAT and the

…

**Interpretation:** Section 238 of the IBC is interpreted to mean that the IBC is a self-contained

…

**Application:** In this case, the Tribunal held that the pendency of recovery proceedings

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** M. M. K…; S. K. MOH…
- **Appellants:** State Bank of…
- **Respondents:** M/s Advance…
- **Advocates:** Vipin…; Abhishek…

## Timeline

- **2015-12-28 — Account Categorized as…**: The account of the corporate debtor was…
- **2017-02-01 — Legal Demand…**: The Petitioner (State Bank of India) issued a legal demand notice to the corporate debtor…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 7 — Initiation of corporate insolvency resolution…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-7)

---

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/nclt-chandigarh/advance-sufactants-india-limited-company-petitiion-no-ib-922-pb-2018-60432842