National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
Sandeep Garg vs Dmi Finance Private Limited on 16 May, 2025
Author: Ashok Bhushan
Bench: Ashok Bhushan
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 539 of 2025
IN THE MATTER OF:
Sandeep Garg ...Appellant
Versus
DMI Finance Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents
Present:
For Appellant : Mr. Manish Paliwal and Ms. Megha Yadav, Advocates
For Respondent : Mr. Vipul Ganda, Ms. Avnika Mishra, Mr. Ishan
Upadhya, Ms. Nitu Barik and Ms. Ishu Bansal,
Advocates for R-1.
Ms. Prachi Johri, Advocate for R-2/RP.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode) 16.05.2025 This Appeal has been filed against the order dated 18.02.2025 by which order Adjudicating Authority has appointed Resolution Professional in Section 95 Application filed by the Financial Creditor.
2. Learned Counsel for the Appellant challenging the order submits that the notice which is claimed to have been issued for invoking the guarantee was not issued to the Appellant i.e. the Guarantor and hence in the application no RP should have been appointed because application was not completed.
3. Mr. Vipul Ganda, Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent contended that the guarantee which was mentioned in the application was incorrect and subsequently, it was replaced by filing Additional Affidavit.
4. We have heard Learned Counsel for the parties.
5. We have looked into the application filed under Section 95 where in the list of date the date of notice dated 03.01.2020 is mentioned as notice for invocation of guarantee notice and another demand notice has been mentioned on 09.07.2022 which is notice under Rule 7 of 2019 Rule. Learned Counsel for the Appellant has also relied on a judgment of this Tribunal in Canara Bank Vs. Babulal Gumanlal Jain in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 297 of 2025 decided on 12.03.2025.
6. We have considered submission of Counsel for the parties and perused the record.
7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dilip B Jiwrajka Vs. Union of India & Ors. in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1281 of 2021 which have been noticed in para 3 of the order has laid down that all adjudicatory issues need to be considered at the time of admission or rejection application under Section
100. The submission which is sought to be raised by the Appellant that the invocation of guarantee dated 03.01.2020 was not issued to the Appellant is an adjudicatary issue of facts, which need to be considered at the time when Adjudicating Authority enters into issue for admission for rejection of the Application.
8. We thus, are of the view that at the stage when RP has been appointed and the order under challenge is the order appointing the Resolution Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 539 of 2025 2 of 3 Professional, the issue raised by the Appellant need not be considered at this stage, and it is open for the Appellant and the Respondent to make his objection and make submission before the Adjudicating Authority when the application comes for admission or rejection at the stage under Section 100. We thus, this stage are not inclined to entertain this appeal with the observation as above, the Appeal is Dismissed.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson [Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) [Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) pks/nn Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 539 of 2025 3 of 3