The application for initiating CIRP against a corporate guarantor under Section 7 of the IBC was dismissed because the demand date fell within the moratorium period specified under Section 10A of the Code.
Petition C.P.(IB)/143(MB)/2021 dismissed as not maintainable.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH
COURT – IV
C.P.(IB)/143(MB)/2021
CORAM:
SHRI PRABHAT KUMAR SHRI KISHORE VEMULAPALLI MEMBER (Technical) MEMBER (Judicial)
ORDER SHEET OF THE HEARING HELD ON 09.03.2023
NAME OF THE PARTIES: Vikram Kumar Vs Aranca (Mumbai) Private Limited
SECTION: 7 OF INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CODE, 2016.
O R D E R
The Court is convened through Video Conference.
Contd…..2
09.03.2023 / pvs
C.P.(IB)/143(MB)/2021
: 2 :
Sd/- Sd/- PRABHAT KUMAR KISHORE VEMULAPALLI Member (Technical)
KISHORE VEMULAPALLI
Member (Judicial)
09.03.2023 / pvs
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a petition filed under Section 7 of the IBC maintaining that the guarantee amount was due on a date falling within Section 10A period is maintainable.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Sourya Containers Leasing Company
Aranca (Mumbai) Private Limited
Prabhatarao Kishore
Vemulapalli
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
