# In the matter of State Bank of India Vs. J Sunitha & Vishwa Infrastructures and Services Pvt Ltd, IA (IBC)245/2022 in CP (IB) 314/95/HDB/2021

> NCLT judgment dated 2022-03-16. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLT-03702. The case involves an application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The Interim…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 16 Mar 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLT-03702
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/state-bank-of-india-vs-j-sunitha-vishwa-infrastructures-and-services-pvt-ltd-ia-04924635

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The Interim Resolution Professional (IRP), Mr. Kiran Kumar Manikwar, is present. The respondent is deemed to be ex-parte due to failure to file vakalatnama within the stipulated time, despite being allowed to do so. The IRP has filed an application (IA(IBC)235/2022) seeking discharge due to medical reasons.

## Facts

State Bank of India initiated proceedings as the petitioner against J. Sunitha & Vishwa Infrastructures and Services Pvt Ltd. The respondent was deemed ex-parte because their advocate, Mr. Mohammed Rhaeem, although allowed to file vakalat on his representation from 2022-02-21, failed to do so within the stipulated time. The Interim Resolution Professional (IRP), Mr. Kiran Kumar Manikwar, sought discharge from his duties due to medical reasons by filing IA(IBC)235/2022. The relevance of the respondent being ex-parte is that the proceedings can continue without their active participation. The IRP's medical reasons are relevant as they impact his ability to continue in his role.

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) should be discharged from his duties due to …

**Ratio:** An IRP can be discharged from their duties if there are valid reasons, such as medical

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal considered the IRP's submission regarding his medical condition and its

…

**Interpretation:** This reflects the principle that individuals should not be compelled to

…

**Application:** The Tribunal applied this principle to the specific facts of the case, where

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Venkata Ramakrishn…; SH. VEERA BRAHMA…
- **Appellants:** State Bank of…
- **Respondents:** J. Sunitha &…
- **Advocates:** Praveen…; Mohammed…; +1 more

## Timeline

- **2022-02-21 — Advocate Allowed to…**: Mr. Mohammed Rhaeem was allowed to…
- **2022-02-21 — Order Da…**: Order dated 2022-02-21, by virtue of which the respondent is deemed to have been set…

## 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-division-bench-court-i-chenn/state-bank-of-india-vs-j-sunitha-vishwa-infrastructures-and-services-pvt-ltd-ia-04924635