# In the matter of JM Financial Asset Reconstruction Co Ltd Vs. Reena Paul, CP (IBC)/13/KOB/2021

> NCLT judgment dated 2021-09-27. Citation: TCN-2021-NCLT-00996. The case involves multiple petitions (CP(IBC)/13/KOB/2021 to CP(IBC)/19/KOB/2021) filed by JM…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 27 Sept 2021
- **Citation:** TCN-2021-NCLT-00996
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-chandigarh/jm-financial-asset-reconstruction-co-ltd-vs-reena-paul-cp-6097abda

## Summary

### Background

The case involves multiple petitions (CP(IBC)/13/KOB/2021 to CP(IBC)/19/KOB/2021) filed by JM Financial Asset Reconstruction Company Limited under Section 95(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, read with Rule 7(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority for Insolvency Resolution Process for Personal Guarantors to Corporate Debtors) Rules, 2019. These petitions seek to initiate the Insolvency Resolution Process against personal guarantors of the corporate debtor, M/s. Unitek Power Solutions India Limited. The corporate debtor had availed credit facilities from the Federal Bank Limited and defaulted on its debt obligations, leading to its account being classified as a non-performing asset (NPA). The financial facilities were

…

## Facts

M/s. JM Financial Asset Reconstruction Company Limited filed petitions under Section 95(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, against personal guarantors of M/s. Unitek Power Solutions India Limited, the corporate debtor. Unitek Power Solutions India Limited had availed credit facilities from the Federal Bank Limited, including Cash Credit, Bank Guarantee, and Term Loan (IPS). The amount of default was Rs. 38,56,65,007.80 as of 2021-05-31. The corporate debtor failed to meet its debt obligations, leading to its classification as a non-performing asset (NPA). The loans were secured by a charge over properties belonging to the guarantors. The respondents, being the personal guarantors, had undertaken to unconditionally and irrevocably pay the Bank on demand in

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Petitioners have complied with …

**Ratio:** Section 95(4) of the I&B Code, 2016 specifies the requirements for an application for

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal examined the documents and evidence presented by the Petitioners to

…

**Interpretation:** Section 95(4) is interpreted to ensure that the application contains sufficient

…

**Application:** The Tribunal found that the Petitioners had complied with Section 95(4) based

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** RAJESH S…; Ashok Kumar…
- **Appellants:** M/s. JM Financial…
- **Respondents:** M/s. Unitek Power…; Reena…

## Timeline

- **2009-12-06 — Liquidation…**: Liquidation of the Company…
- **2013-03-26 — Assignment Ag…**: Financial assets of Corporate Debtor…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 95 — Application by creditor to initiate insolvency…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-95)

---

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/jm-financial-asset-reconstruction-co-ltd-vs-reena-paul-cp-6097abda