In the matter of Central Bank of India v. Vakalpudi Gnaneswara Rao, Cp (Ib) No. 88/95/AMR/2022
Case brief
What is this about?
The NCLT Amaravati Bench considered an application under Section 95 of IBC to initiate CIRP against a personal guarantor. The court held that no summons or notice is required before appointing an Interim Resolution Professional. Consequently, the court appointed the suggested IRP and directed him to submit a report within 10 days.
What did the court decide?
Appointment of Mr. Madasa Kumar as Interim Resolution Professional; direction to submit report within 10 days.
1
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL AMARAVATI BENCH (Video Conference)
PRESENT: JUSTICE TELAPROLU RAJANI – MEMBER JUDICIAL ATTENDANCE-CUM-ORDER SHEET OF THE HEARING HELD 10.10.2022 AT 10.30 AM
| TC/CP. Nos. | CA/IA No. | Section/ Rule |
Name of Parties |
|---|---|---|---|
| CP(IB)No.88/95/AMR/2022 | 95 of | Central Bank of India Vs. Mr. | |
| IBC | Vakkalapudi Gnaneswara Rao & M/s | ||
| Sri Ananda Lakshmi Narasimha Industries Private Limited |
Counsel for Petitioner(s):
Ries
| Name of the Counsel(s) Designation |
E-mail & Telephone No. Signature |
|---|
Counsel for Respondent(s):
Ries
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether summons or notice is required to be issued to the personal guarantor and corporate debtor before the appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional under Section 97 of IBC.
Whether the appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional without notice to the parties violates the principles of natural justice.
Whether the application filed under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is complete and admissible in law.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Central Bank of India
- respondent
Mr. Vakkalapudi Gnaneswara Rao
- respondent
M/s Sri Ananda Lakshmi Narasimha Industries Private Limited
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court