# In the matter of Indian Bank vs. Varez karsi Dadina & Ors.

> NCLT judgment dated 2026-04-07. Citation: TCN-2026-NCLT-00394. Indian Bank, the Financial Creditor, filed an application under Section 95(1) of the Insolvency…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 7 Apr 2026
- **Citation:** TCN-2026-NCLT-00394
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-kolkata/indian-bank-vs-varez-karsi-dadina-ors-e5ca7c00

## Summary

### Background

Indian Bank, the Financial Creditor, filed an application under Section 95(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking initiation of the Insolvency Resolution Process against Varez Karsi Dadina, the Personal Guarantor, for a debt owed by M/s. KND Engineering Technologies Limited (Corporate Debtor). The application was filed due to the personal guarantor's failure to pay the outstanding debt.

## Facts

M/s. KND Engineering Technologies Limited (Corporate Debtor) availed credit facilities from Indian Bank (Financial Creditor) with a sanction limit of Rs. 55 crores.

Varez Karsi Dadina furnished a Personal Guarantee to secure the credit facilities granted to M/s. KND Engineering Technologies Limited.

The account of the Corporate Debtor was classified as Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on 02/05/2018.

The outstanding debt and uncharged interest as of 13/10/2020 was Rs. 61,49,71,280.62.

Indian Bank issued a demand notice on 13/10/2020 to Varez Karsi Dadina under Rule 7(1) of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority for Insolvency Resolution Process of Personal Guarantor to Corporate Debtor) Rules, 2019.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the application under Section 95 of the IBC is maintainable without a valid invocation of …

**Ratio:** The NCLT relied on precedents such as State Bank of India vs. Mr. Deepak Kumar Singhania

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLT reasoned that the liability of the guarantor arises only when a demand notice is

…

**Interpretation:** The NCLT interpreted the legal precedents to mean that a clear and unambiguous

…

**Application:** The NCLT applied this interpretation to the facts of the case, finding that the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** BIDISHA BA…; Siddharth…
- **Appellants:** Indian…; Sanjit Kuma…
- **Respondents:** KND Engineering…; Varez Karsi…
- **Other parties:** Pessi Nanabhoy…; Navzer Kersi…; +2 more
- **Advocates:** Santosh Kum…; Zeba…; +4 more

## Timeline

- **2018-05-02 — NPA Decla…**: Account of Corporate Debtor…
- **2020-10-13 — Demand N…**: Applicant issued demand notice as the Personal Guarantor has failed to pay unpaid debt in…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 99(1) — Submission of report by resolution professional](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-99)

---

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-kolkata/indian-bank-vs-varez-karsi-dadina-ors-e5ca7c00