# In the matter of Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd Vs. Sunil Sarojbhai Shah, CP (IB)/751/MB/2022

> NCLT judgment dated 2022-08-23. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLT-01309. Tata Capital Financial Services Limited filed a Company Petition for the initiation of the…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 23 Aug 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLT-01309
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/tata-capital-financial-services-ltd-vs-sunil-sarojbhai-shah-cp-f8231fac

## Summary

### Background

Tata Capital Financial Services Limited filed a Company Petition for the initiation of the Insolvency Resolution Process against the Respondent/Personal Guarantor, Mr. Sunil Sarojbhai Shah, under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The petitioner's counsel presented a demand notice dated 18.02.2021, along with a track report dated 04.03.2022, indicating the demand notice was duly served. The petitioner also referred to a deed of Guarantee dated 29.12.2016 executed by Mr. Sunil Sarojbhai Shah, the Personal Guarantor of the Corporate Debtor.

## Facts

Tata Capital Financial Services Limited filed a petition under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking to initiate the Insolvency Resolution Process against Mr. Sunil Sarojbhai Shah, the personal guarantor of the Corporate Debtor. A demand notice dated 18.02.2021 was served on the personal guarantor, as evidenced by the track report dated 04.03.2022. The petitioner also presented a deed of Guarantee dated 29.12.2016 executed by Mr. Shah. Notices sent to the respondent were returned unclaimed but were deemed served as per the law. The petitioner suggested the name of a Resolution Professional.

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the service of notice to the …

**Ratio:** When notices sent through registry are returned as 'unclaimed,' it is deemed service as

…

**Reasoning:** The court noted that the notices sent to the respondent/personal guarantor were returned

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of the law is that even if a notice is returned unclaimed,

…

**Application:** In this case, since the notices were sent through registry and returned

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** H.V. Subb…; SMT ANURADHA…
- **Appellants:** Tata Capital…
- **Respondents:** Sunil Sarojbhai…
- **Advocates:** Akshay P…

## Timeline

- **2016-12-29 — Deed of Gua…**: Mr. Sunil Sarojbhai Shah…
- **2021-02-18 — Demand Noti…**: Demand notice was issued to…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 95(1) — 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/tata-capital-financial-services-ltd-vs-sunil-sarojbhai-shah-cp-f8231fac