AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
a)In view of the above said facts, reasons and relative circumstances of the case, the petitioner Bank respectfully prays that this Hon’ble Court may pleased to;
b)Call for the entire records of proceedings in CP IB (BB) 318/2025 pending before the NCLT, Bengaluru.
c)Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, or order or direction directing the learned NCLT, Bengaluru to consider and pass appropriate orders in the interlocutory Application (Bearing IA/I.B.C/1095/BEN/2025) filed by the petitioner Bank before taking any further proceedings in the pending CP IB(BB) 318/2025.
d)To grant such other suitable relief or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit to grant, in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.
The petitioner having succeeded in the proceedings initiated against respondent no.1 for recovery of monies by filing an original application before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, a recovery certificate having been issued which was in the process of being executed, the personal guarantor has filed the proceedings under Section 94 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for short, ‘IBC Act’) before the NCLT, is coming in the way of the execution of the recovery certificate issued in favour of the petitioner - bank.
The submission of Sri.T.P.Muthanna learned counsel for the petitioner is that, in the said proceedings, the petitioner - bank had filed an application in No.IA/IBC-1095/BEN/2025 for dismissal of the said proceedings on the ground that it is not maintainable and had sought to place on record the various events which have occurred including the recovery certificate which has been issued in favour of the petitioner.
The NCLT vide its order dated 27.03.2026 was of the opinion that the application can be considered after the report is filed by the Resolution Professional in terms of Section 100 of the IBC. By the time, the petitioner had filed the application, the Resolution Professional had already been appointed and interim moratorium had been declared. The Resolution Professional is in the process of preparing the report and submitting it in terms Section 97 of the Act. On the submission made of the report under Section 99, the admissibility or rejection of the application filed by the respondent would have to be adjudicated by the NCLT.
In that view of the matter, since the Resolution Professional has already been appointed and is in the process of filing a report in terms of Section 97 and 99 thereof, which is expected to be filed very soon, directing the NCLT to consider the application filed by the petitioner in No.IA/IBC-1095/BEN/2025 along with the report submitted by the Resolution Professional in terms of Section 100 of the IBC 2016, the petition stands disposed. Needless to say, without consideration of the application in No.IA/IBC-1095/BEN/2025, no order as regard the admission or rejection under Section 100 can be passed by the NCLT.