Indian Bank Stressed Assets Management Branch Vs K R Tirumuruhan Green Haven (NCLAT Chennai)
National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Chennai Bench, has dismissed an appeal by Indian Bank’s Stressed Assets Management Branch (SAMB), affirming that a subsequent application to initiate insolvency resolution proceedings against a personal guarantor is barred if a similar action is already pending.
Indian Bank, as the financial creditor, challenged an order dated January 6, 2025, issued by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Chennai Bench. The NCLT had deemed Indian Bank’s application under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), aimed at K.R. Tirumuruhan (Green Haven), as infructuous and dismissed it, granting liberty to file afresh later.
The NCLAT observed that this issue mirrored an earlier case, Indian Bank, SAMB, Chennai v. T. Prabhakar (Comp App (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 121/2025). In that judgment, delivered on April 30, 2025, the NCLAT had upheld an NCLT order that dismissed an application under Section 95(1) IBC against another personal guarantor. The basis for dismissal in that instance was the pre-existence of proceedings initiated by another financial creditor, IDBI Trusteeship Services Limited, against the same personal guarantor under Section 95 IBC (CP(IB) No. 785/2020). The NCLAT had ruled that Section 96 of the IBC creates a bar against entertaining subsequent applications under Section 95 when a proceeding is already underway against the personal guarantor.
