# Dilip B Jiwrajka Vs. Union of India & Ors. [Writ Petition (Civil) No 1281 of 2021]

> SC judgment dated 2023-11-09. Citation: TCN-2023-SC-00016. The case involves a batch of writ petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the…

- **Court:** SC
- **Order date:** 9 Nov 2023
- **Citation:** TCN-2023-SC-00016
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/supreme-court-of-india/dilip-b-jiwrajka-vs-union-of-india-ors-32d75585

## Summary

### Background

The case involves a batch of writ petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the constitutional validity of Sections 95 to 100 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 (IBC). These sections pertain to the insolvency resolution process for individuals and partnership firms, specifically addressing personal guarantors to corporate debtors. The petitioners argue that these sections violate principles of natural justice and are arbitrary. The court examines the scheme of the IBC, particularly Part II (corporate insolvency) and Part III (individual insolvency), to determine the validity of the challenged provisions.

## Facts

The petitioners, in a batch of 384 petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution, challenged the constitutional validity of Sections 95 to 100 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). These sections relate to the insolvency resolution process for personal guarantors to corporate debtors under Part III of the IBC. The petitioners argued that the provisions violate principles of natural justice by allowing for an interim moratorium and appointment of a resolution professional without a prior hearing. They also contended that the powers granted to the resolution professional are excessive and infringe on the right to privacy. The respondents, including the Union of India and the State Bank of India, argued that the provisions are necessary for the efficient

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether Sections 95 to 100 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, violate Article 14 and …

**Ratio:** The provisions of Sections 95 to 100 of the IBC do not violate Article 14 and Article 21

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasons that the resolution professional's role is primarily to collate and

…

**Interpretation:** The court interprets Sections 95 to 100 to provide for a balanced process that

…

**Application:** The court applies this reasoning to the specific provisions challenged by the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Dr Dhananjaya Y…; J.B. PARD…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Dilip B Ji…
- **Respondents:** Union of…
- **Other parties:** 7th Edition…; Personal Gu…; +10 more

## Timeline

- **2016-01-01 — Enactment of the…**: The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, is enacted to consolidate and amend the laws…
- **2019-11-15 — Notification bringing into force Sections 94 to…**: The Union Government issues a notification bringing into force Sections 2(e), 78, 79, 94…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 1(3) — Short title, extent and commencement](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-1)

---

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/supreme-court-of-india/dilip-b-jiwrajka-vs-union-of-india-ors-32d75585