Bank cannot do forum shopping to recover its dues

-

 



Shubham Budhiraja[1]

Shubhambudhiraja02@gmail.com , Tel: 011-45059142, M: 9654055315

Trust A & Trust B & Company C took loan from the Bank wherein CD given corporate guarantee. The Bank took action under SARFESI, DRT, HC and then IBC against CD. NCLAT remand the matter to NCLT to decide afresh because Bank seems to doing forum shopping to build pressure of recovery. Recovery is not aim of IBC[2].

 

(I)                 The Bank is involved in forum shopping to the multiple ‘Courts/Tribunals’ just to harass the ‘Guarantor’ as it has moved the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta at Calcutta to coerce the trust into paying of its debts and involving the Appellant in time consuming and expensive litigation at the behest of this concerned branch of the Bank.

 

(II)               It is a settled law that the practice of Forum Shopping be condemned as it is an abuse of law. This case is beyond doubt falls under the category of Forum Shopping as it is a classic example of Forum Shopping when the Respondent Bank has approached one Court for relief but does not get the desired relief and then approached another court for the same or similar relief; (refer) Hon’ble Apex Court Judgment in Union of India & Ors. Vs. Cipla Ltd. & Anr (2017) 5 SCC 262- para 148, Vijay Kumar Ghai & Ors. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. in Criminal Appeal No. 463 of 2022- para 9.

 

(III)              The Hon’ble Supreme Court has already settled the matter that the provision of the Code is not intended to be a substitute to be a recovery forum. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.9597 of 2018, “Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh limited Vs. Equipment Conductors and Cables Company Appeal(AT)(Insolvency) No. 1138 of 2019 Page 29 of 31 Limited” vide para 15 has already held that IBC is not intended to be a substitute to a recovery forum and also laid down that whenever there is existence of real dispute, the IBC provisions cannot be invoked. The Code cannot be used whenever there is existence of real dispute and also whenever the intention is to use the Code as a means for chasing of payment or building pressure for releasing the payments.


[1] Advocate, Delhi High Court [LLB,ACS,BCOM(H)]

[2] Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No. 1138 of 2019, NCLAT, New Delhi

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

REPUGANCY UNDER ARTICLE 254 & TEST OF VALIDATING LAW

-
Image
  Shubham Budhiraja [1] [1] Company Secretary, LLB Final Year,DU & Bcom (H) The land acquisition falls in concurrent list and parliament in year 2013 has introduced a new act which provides for rehabilitation, compensation and procedure on land acquisition of property. The State of T.N has made 3 different state laws w.r.t. land acquisition which was struck off by the High Court. Thereafter, state of TN in year 2019 enacted the same law but with president assent under Article 254 to avoid the repugnancy with 2013 act under Article 254. The appeal filed before apex court w.r.t. repugnancy of 2019 state law with 2013 central law & test of validating the struck off law. The Supreme Court observed as: VALIDATING A LAW WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT Case Law Relevant Remarks National  Agricultural  Cooperative  Marketing  Federation  of India Ltd. & Anr. vs. Union o...
Read more

Whether a person can be appointed as an arbitrator if his daughter is married to the son of the eldest brother of one of the parties in the arbitration proceedings?

-
Image
    Shubham Budhiraja [1] Two brothers running a family business in the form of a company and dispute arise between them and both decide to resolve through arbitration. During course of arbitration proceedings, one of party filed Section 14(2) r/w Section 15 Petition filed challenging mandate of arbitrator as being terminated because son of arbitrator is married to daughter of eldest brother of one of party and thus should be disqualified under Section 12(5) being ‘close family relationship’. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court declined the relief and held that neither the Seventh Schedule of the A&C Act nor the IBA Guidelines define the expression ‘close family relationship’. The plain language of Entry no. 9 indicates that it is not the legislative intent to render a distant relative of the parties to be ineligible for being appointed as an arbitrator, if both the parties so agree. It is not sufficient that the arbitrator is related to any one of the parties; the relation...
Read more

Whether unstamped agreement to sell executed in the year 1988 can be relied upon in suit for possession?

-
Image
  Whether unstamped agreement to sell executed in the year 1988 can be relied upon in suit for possession?   Under what circumstances, photocopy of agreement to sell can be relied upon as secondary evidence?   Shubham Budhiraja [1]   A filed a suit for possession against B on basis of agreement to sell executed in the year 1989. During the hearing, A filed IA for reading photocopy of agreement to sell as secondary evidence because he is not able to find the original agreement to sell. The Trial Court allowed the IA but in review rejected that because agreement to sell was insufficiently stamped therefore bar of section 35 of stamp act applies. The High Court confirmed the order. The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that bar of Section 35 will not apply because amendment of 1990 wherein explanation was added to the stamp act was substantive in nature and therefore new obligation of stamping cannot be imposed on agreement of sell executed between A and B. [2] ...
Read more