Disposed¶73

Bimla Lather v. Intec Capital Ltd. & Ors.

Delhi HC28 Apr 2026W.P.(C)/7012/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Personal guarantors to corporate debtors; Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Sections 95, 96, 99, 100, 101; Part III IBC; Notification dated 15.11.2019; SO No. 4126(E); Ministry of Corporate Affairs; constitutional validity; vires; surety/guarantor discharge on approval of resolution plan; Lalit Kumar Jain v. Union of India (2021) 9 SCC 321; Transfer Petition (Civil) 1034/2020 IBBI v. Lalit Kumar Jain; sine die adjournment; disposal in terms of Supreme Court judgment; Delhi High Court writ petition batch 2020; Prathiba M. Singh; Madhu Jain.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; the writ petitions and pending applications are disposed of in terms of the Supreme Court's judgment dated 21.05.2021, the challenge to the notification not surviving. ¶73

Bimla Lather Vs Intec Capital Ltd. & Ors. — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief granted; the writ petitions and pending applications are disposed of in terms of the Supreme Court's judgment dated 21.05.2021, the challenge to the notification not surviving.

¶73

Issue for consideration

Vires and constitutional validity of the Notification dated 15.11.2019 (SO No. 4126(E)) issued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, and of Sections 95, 96, 99, 100 and 101 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, insofar as they apply to personal guarantors of corporate debtors.

¶40

Court's answer

Since the Supreme Court, by judgment dated 21.05.2021 in Lalit Kumar Jain v. Union of India, (2021) 9 SCC 321, has already upheld the notification dated 15.11.2019 and the connected provisions, the challenge raised in the present petitions no longer survives.

¶72

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Batch of sixteen writ petitions (lead matter: W.P.(C) 4849/2020, Lalit Kumar Jain v. Union of India) before the High Court of Delhi challenging the notification dated 15.11.2019 (SO No. 4126(E)) issued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs bringing into force Part III of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 insofar as it applies to personal guarantors to corporate debtors, and the constitutional validity of Sections 95, 96, 99, 100 and 101 of the Code. After the Supreme Court allowed Transfer Petition (C) 1034/2020 (order dated 29.10.2020) directing transfer of such writ petitions to itself, this Court adjourned the batch sine die on 10.11.2020. The Supreme Court thereafter delivered final judgment on 21.05.2021 in Lalit Kumar Jain v. Union of India, (2021) 9 SCC 321, upholding the impugned notification and holding that approval of a resolution plan does not ipso facto discharge a personal guarantor of his or her liabilities. Held (Prathiba M. Singh and Madhu Jain, JJ., order dated 28.04.2026): the challenge no longer survives; the writ petitions and pending applications stand disposed of in terms of the Supreme Court's judgment dated 21.05.2021. No relief granted to the petitioners.

¶1

$~35 to 50

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) 4849/2020 & CM APPL. 17492/2020 LALIT KUMAR JAIN .....Petitioner

¶4

versus

¶5

UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE & ORS. .....Respondents

¶6

~36 + W.P.(C) 5712/2020 & CM APPL. 20648/2020, CM APPL. 23898/2020, CM APPL. 25080/2020

¶7

ANIL DHIRAJLAL AMBANI .....Petitioner

¶8

versus

¶9

STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents ~37 + W.P.(C) 5881/2020 & CM APPL. 21259/2020 BALA CHHABRA & ORS. .....Petitioners versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents ~38 + W.P.(C) 5912/2020 & CM APPL. 21385/2020 ATUL PUNJ .....Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents ~39 + W.P.(C) 5918/2020 & CM APPL. 21401/2020, CM APPL. 25692/2020 YOGESH MEHRA .....Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents ~40 + W.P.(C) 5942/2020 & CM APPL. 21468/2020, CM APPL.

¶10

W.P.(C) 4849/2020 and connected matters

¶11

Page 1 of 8

¶12

This is a digitally signed order.

¶13

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/05/2026 at 12:48:07

¶14

25685/2020 AJAY MEHRA

¶15

.....Petitioner

¶16

versus

¶17

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents ~41 + W.P.(C) 6169/2020 & CM APPL. 22094/2020, CM APPL. 25079/2020 ATUL PUNJ .....Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents ~42 + W.P.(C) 6209/2020 & CM APPL. 22244/2020 RM GARG .....Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents ~43 + W.P.(C) 6745/2020 & CM APPL. 23432/2020 SANJAY SINGHAL .....Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents ~44 + W.P.(C) 6746/2020 & CM APPL. 23436/2020 AARTI SINGAL, .....Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents ~45 + W.P.(C) 7010/2020 & CM APPL. 23911/2020, CM APPL. 24778/2020 BHAVNA LATHER .....Petitioner versus

¶18

W.P.(C) 4849/2020 and connected matters

¶19

Page 2 of 8

¶20

This is a digitally signed order.

¶21

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/05/2026 at 12:48:07

¶22

INTEC CAPITAL LTD & ORS. .....Respondents ~46 + W.P.(C) 7011/2020 & CM APPL. 23914/2020, CM APPL. 24766/2020 JOGINDER SINGH LATHER .....Petitioner versus INTEC CAPITAL LTD & ORS. .....Respondents ~47 + W.P.(C) 7012/2020 & CM APPL. 23917/2020, CM APPL. 24768/2020 BIMLA LATHER .....Petitioner versus INTEC CAPITAL LTD & ORS. .....Respondents ~48 + W.P.(C) 7018/2020 & CM APPL. 23932/2020, CM APPL. 23933/2020, CM APPL. 23934/2020, CM APPL. 24767/2020 CHITRESH LATHER .....Petitioner versus INTEC CAPITAL LTD & ORS. .....Respondents ~49 + W.P.(C) 7189/2020 & CM APPL. 24307/20, CM APPL. 24308/2020 ANIL NANDA .....Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS & ORS. .....Respondents ~50 + W.P.(C) 8537/2020 & CM APPL. 27521/2020, CM APPL. 27522/2020 VERINDER KUMAR CHHABRA & ORS. .....Petitioners versus UNION BANK OF INDIA, THROUGH ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, STRESSED ASSET MANAGEMENT VERTICAL &

¶23

W.P.(C) 4849/2020 and connected matters

¶24

Page 3 of 8

¶25

This is a digitally signed order.

¶26

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/05/2026 at 12:48:07

¶27

ORS.

¶28

.....Respondents

¶29

Appearances on behalf of the Petitioners:

¶30

Mr. Rajiv Singh, Mr. Neeraj Kumar, Advs. Mr. Manish Paliwal and Ms. Megha Yadav, Advs. Mr. Rohit Sharma, Mr. Jatin Lalwani, Mr. Nikhil Purohit and Mr. Jay Rawat, Advs.

¶31

Appearances on behalf of the Respondents:

¶32

Ms. Pratima N. Lakra, CGSC with Mr. Shailendra Kumar Mishra and Ms. Upanita Soumyadarshini, Advs. for UOI Mr. Manish Kumar, Adv.

¶33

Mr. P.S. Singh, CGSC with Ms. Annu Singh, Ms. Shivangi Sharma, Mr. Aditya Tomar, Mr. Rajneesh K. Shamar, Advs. Mr. Varun Kalra, Mr. Krishan Kumar, Advs.

¶34

Mr. Vikas Mehta, Mr. Vaishak Omanakuttan, Mr. Kartik Pandey, Advs. Ms. Surabhi Khattar, Mr. Sriharsh Raj, Ms. Pallavi Agarwal, Advs. Mr. Ajay Kumar Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Jitendra Kumar Tripathi and Mr. Arunav Padhi, Advs. Mr. Vivek Goyal, CGSPC and Mr. Aryan Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Anmol Sharma, Adv. Mr. Vikrant Nilesh Goyal, Ms. Nitika Goyal, Mr. Yash Basoya, Mr. Inderpreet Singh, Mr. Kunal Dixit, Advs.

¶35

CORAM:

¶36

JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE MADHU JAIN

¶37

O R D E R

¶38

% 28.04.2026

¶39

This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

¶40

In all these matters, challenge was raised, inter alia, in respect of notification dated 15^th November, 2019 issued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government of India, as also constitutional validity of Sections 95, 96, 99, 100 and 101 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 insofar as they apply to personal guarantors of corporate debtors.

¶41

W.P.(C) 4849/2020 and connected matters

¶42

Page 4 of 8

¶43

This is a digitally signed order.

¶44

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/05/2026 at 12:48:07

¶45

Similar challenge was raised in writ petitions filed before the various High Courts, leading to transfer petitions being filed before the Supreme Court. Transfer Petition (Civil) 1034/2020 titled Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India v. Lalit Kumar Jain & Ors ., along with other connected Transfer Petitions was listed before the Supreme Court on 29^th October, 2020, wherein it was directed as under:-

¶46

“6. After hearing the submissions made by the parties, we are of the considered opinion that the Writ Petitions that are pending in the High Courts pertaining to the challenge to the Notification dated 15.11.2019 and related issues have to be transferred to this Court. Transfer of the Writ Petitions to this Court would avoid conflicting decisions by the High Courts which are in seisin of the Writ Petitions. The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is at a nascent stage and it is better that the interpretation of the provisions of the Code is taken up by this Court to avoid any confusion, and to authoritatively settle the law. Considering the importance of the issues raised in the Writ Petitions which need finality of judicial determination at the earliest, it is just and proper that the Writ Petitions are transferred from the High Courts to this Court. 7. We direct the transfer of the Writ Petitions giving rise to the above Transfer Petitions which are pending before the High Courts to this Court. The Registries of the High Courts are directed to transmit the records of the Writ Petitions forthwith.

¶47

8. As we have transferred the Writ Petitions filed challenging the Notification dated 15.11.2019 and related issues to this Court, we direct that no further Writ Petitions involving the challenge to the Notification dated 15.11.2019 by which Part III of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and other provisions in so far as they relate to personal guarantors to corporate debtors have been brought into force shall be

¶48

This is a digitally signed order.

¶49

W.P.(C) 4849/2020 and connected matters

¶50

Page 5 of 8

¶51

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/05/2026 at 12:48:07

¶52

entertained by any High Court. The interim orders passed by the High Courts, if any, shall continue till further orders.

¶53

9. The Transfer Petitions are allowed, accordingly.”

¶54

Thus, several writ petitions pending before the High Courts stood transferred to the Supreme Court.

¶55

Vide order dated 10th November, 2020 the present batch of petitions had been adjourned sine die in view of the transfer petitions which were filed before the Supreme Court. The relevant portion of the order dated 10^th November, 2020 reads as under:

¶56

“Learned counsels submit that in respect of some of the matters transfer orders have not yet been passed. However, it is also not disputed that transfer petitions in respect of even those of the matters which have been filed after the aforesaid order of the Supreme Court, have been preferred or, are in the process of being preferred. The intent of the order passed by the Supreme Court is very clear which is to transfer all such matters to itself from all High Courts. In that view of the matter, we are not inclined to hear any of these petitions till further orders from the Supreme Court. The petitions are accordingly adjourned sine die with liberty to the parties to move to this Court as and when occasion arises. Registry shall transfer forthwith the records of the petitions to the Supreme Court where requisitions have been received.”

¶57

Today, the Court is informed that the final judgement in these matters has been passed by the Supreme Court on 21^st May, 2021 in [(2021) 9 SCC 321] titled Lalit Kumar Jain v. Union of India & Ors. and connected cases . A copy of the judgement has been handed over to the Court. In terms of the

¶58

Page 6 of 8

¶59

W.P.(C) 4849/2020 and connected matters

¶60

This is a digitally signed order.

¶61

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/05/2026 at 12:48:07

¶62

said judgement, the impugned notification dated 15^th November, 2019 has been upheld in the following terms:

¶63

“2. The common question which arises in all these cases concerns the vires and validity of a Notification dated 15-11-2019 issued by the Central Government, SO No. 4126 (E) issued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Central Government (hereafter called “the impugned notification”). Other reliefs too have been claimed concerning the validity of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority for Insolvency Resolution Process for Personal Guarantors to Corporate Debtors) Rules, 2019 issued on 15-11-2019. Likewise, the validity of regulations challenged by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India on 20-11-2019 are also the subject-matter of challenge. However, during the course of submissions, the learned counsel for the parties stated that the challenge would be confined to the impugned notification.

¶64

xxxx

¶65

111. In view of the above discussion, it is held that approval of a resolution plan does not ipso facto discharge a personal guarantor (of a corporate debtor) of her or his liabilities under the contract of guarantee. As held by this court, the release or discharge of a principal borrower from the debt owed by it to its creditor, by an involuntary process, i.e. by operation of law, or due to liquidation or insolvency proceeding, does not absolve the surety/guarantor of his or her liability, which arises out of an independent contract.

¶66

112. For the foregoing reasons, it is held that the impugned notification is legal and valid. It is also held that approval of a resolution plan relating to a corporate debtor does not operate so as to

¶67

This is a digitally signed order.

¶68

W.P.(C) 4849/2020 and connected matters

¶69

Page 7 of 8

¶70

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/05/2026 at 12:48:07

¶71

discharge the liabilities of personal guarantors (to corporate debtors). The writ petitions, transferred cases and transfer petitions are accordingly dismissed in the above terms, without order on costs.”

¶72

Since the validity of the notification dated 15^th November, 2019 and the connected provisions has already been decided by the Supreme Court vide judgment dated 21^st May, 2021 as extracted above, the challenge in the present petitions would no longer survive.

¶73

The writ petitions along with pending applications, if any, are also disposed of in terms of the judgement dated 21^st May, 2021 passed by the Supreme Court.

¶74

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.

¶75

MADHU JAIN, J.

¶76

APRIL 28, 2026/ prg/msh

¶77

W.P.(C) 4849/2020 and connected matters

¶78

Page 8 of 8

¶79

This is a digitally signed order.

¶80

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/05/2026 at 12:48:07

Cite this judgement

Bimla Lather v. Intec Capital Ltd. & Ors., W.P.(C)/7012/2020 (DEL), decided on 28 April 2026.

The High Court of Delhi publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Cases cited2

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India v. Lalit Kumar Jain & OrsRelied on¶45
Lalit Kumar Jain v. Union of India & Ors.Applied¶57

Open Authorities

Statutes3

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016Sections 95, 96, 99, 100 and 101 · Part III
Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority for Insolvency Resolution Process for Personal Guarantors to Corporate Debtors) Rules, 2019Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority for Insolvency Resolution Process for Personal Guarantors to Corporate Debtors) Rules, 2019

View all statutes

Procedural history4

Notification dated 15th November, 2019 (SO No. 4126(E)) issued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government of India, bringing into force Part III of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 insofar as it relates to personal guarantors to corporate debtors; the petitioners also challenged the constitutional validity of Sections 95, 96, 99, 100 and 101 of the Code.Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government of India · 15.11.2019
Similar challenges were raised in writ petitions before various High Courts, leading to Transfer Petitions before the Supreme Court; Transfer Petition (Civil) 1034/2020 (Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India v. Lalit Kumar Jain & Ors) and connected TPs, listed on 29.10.2020, were allowed: writ petitions pending before the High Courts were directed to be transferred to the Supreme Court, High Courts were barred from entertaining further such writ petitions, and interim orders were to continue.
By order dated 10.11.2020 this Court adjourned the present batch of petitions sine die in view of the transfer petitions before the Supreme Court, with liberty to the parties to move as and when occasion arises, and directed the Registry to transfer records where requisitions had been received.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Madhu Jain

Parties & counsel

Bimla Lather v. Intec Capital Ltd. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bimla Lather v. Intec Capital Ltd. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tata Play Limited Vs Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs & Ors.

Deepak Kumar Jha Vs Uco Bank and Ors.

Soniya Vs Bsf through Its Director General and Ors.

Lawrence Bishnoi Vs Union of India & Ors.

Mr Divesh Gupta Vs Union of India & Ors.

Ns Trading Vs Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs & Ors.

Ms Dermaclinix the Complete Skin and Hair Solution Center Vs Additional Commissioner Central Goods and Services Tax Delhi East

Chander Mohan and Ors. Vs Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Mohd.Saquib Ansari Vs State NCT of Delhi

Waqar Azhar Vs State NCT of Delhi

Umesh Chaudhary Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Anil Nanda Vs Union of India and Ors. & Ors.

Bhavna Lather Vs Intec Capital Ltd. & Ors.

Abdul Rashid Sheikh Vs Nia