# In the matter of Sunil Kumar Kedia vs. Rohit S Sharma

> NCLT judgment dated 2024-08-21. Citation: TCN-2024-NCLT-00766. The case pertains to an application filed by the Resolution Professional (RP), Sunil Kumar…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 21 Aug 2024
- **Citation:** TCN-2024-NCLT-00766
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/sunil-kumar-kedia-vs-rohit-s-sharma-1f8f78f1

## Summary

### Background

The case pertains to an application filed by the Resolution Professional (RP), Sunil Kumar Kedia, in the matter of Personal Guarantor Shri Rohit S. Sharma under Sections 106 and 112 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, read with Regulation 20 of the IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Personal Guarantors to Corporate Debtors) Regulations, 2019. The application was filed in connection with Company Petition CP (IB) No. 243 of 2021, initiated by the Financial Creditor against the Personal Guarantor. The Tribunal had previously admitted an application under Section 95 of the IBC, 2016, regarding the Insolvency Resolution Process against Rohit S Sharma, who is the personal guarantor for credit facilities provided by State Bank of India to the Corporate

…

## Facts

On 2024-01-04, the Tribunal admitted an application under Section 95 of the IBC, 2016, initiating the Insolvency Resolution Process against Rohit S Sharma, the personal guarantor for credit facilities provided by State Bank of India to CLS Industries Private Limited. Sunil Kumar Kedia was appointed as the Resolution Professional. A public announcement inviting claims was made on 2024-01-10. The RP prepared a list of creditors, which was later modified due to Raj Radhe Finance Limited's decision not to forfeit its right on the mortgaged asset. Despite repeated requests, the Personal Guarantor failed to submit a repayment plan or provide details of assets. Five meetings of the Committee of Creditors were held between 2024-03-04 and 2024-06-04, where the non-submission of

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the delay in filing the report by the …

**Ratio:** The Adjudicating Authority has the power to

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal noted that there was a delay of 33 days in filing the report by the

…

**Interpretation:** This highlights the court's discretion to overlook procedural delays when it

…

**Application:** The Adjudicating Authority condoned the 33-day delay in filing the report,

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** SHAMMI…; SAMEER…
- **Appellants:** Sunil Kumar…
- **Respondents:** CLS Industries…; Rohit S S…
- **Advocates:** Aditi S…; Atul Sh…; +4 more

## Timeline

- **2024-01-04 — Application A…**: Tribunal admitted an application under section…
- **2024-01-10 — Public Annou…**: Resolution Professional made a…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 106 — Report of resolution professional on repayment…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-106)

---

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/sunil-kumar-kedia-vs-rohit-s-sharma-1f8f78f1