The Financial Creditor filed an application under Section 95 of the Code seeking initiation of CIRP against the personal guarantor of the Corporate Debtor. The Respondent argued that the personal guarantee was barred by limitation and not filed through RP, thus liable for dismissal. The Applicant submitted an order from NCLAT in Ravi Ajit Kulkarni Vs. State Bank of India dated 12.08.2021, contending that all pleadings could be addressed during the admission of the Corporate Debtor into CIRP.
The State Bank of India, as the Financial Creditor, filed an application under Section 95 of the IBC seeking initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Vishal Ramesh Karia, the personal guarantor of the Corporate Debtor. The respondent argued that the application was barred by limitation and had not been filed through a Resolution Professional (RP). The applicant countered by submitting a copy of an order from the NCLAT in the case of Ravi Ajit Kulkarni Vs. State Bank of India, dated 12.08.2021, arguing that all pleadings could be taken up at the time of admission of the Corporate Debtor into CIRP. The court considered the aspect of filing the application by the creditors as per the provisions of Section 95(1).
Sign in to view the parties.
Order delivered by the…
Order from NCLAT in the…
The Financial Creditor filed an application under Section 95 of the Code seeking initiation of CIRP against the personal guarantor of the Corporate Debtor. The Respondent argued that the personal guarantee was barred by limitation and not filed through RP, thus liable for dismissal. The Applicant submitted an order from NCLAT in Ravi Ajit Kulkarni Vs. State Bank of India dated 12.08.2021, contending that all pleadings could be addressed during the admission of the Corporate Debtor into CIRP.
The State Bank of India, as the Financial Creditor, filed an application under Section 95 of the IBC seeking initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Vishal Ramesh Karia, the personal guarantor of the Corporate Debtor. The respondent argued that the application was barred by limitation and had not been filed through a Resolution Professional (RP). The applicant countered by submitting a copy of an order from the NCLAT in the case of Ravi Ajit Kulkarni Vs. State Bank of India, dated 12.08.2021, arguing that all pleadings could be taken up at the time of admission of the Corporate Debtor into CIRP. The court considered the aspect of filing the application by the creditors as per the provisions of Section 95(1).
Order delivered by the…
Order from NCLAT in the…