Vineet Mohan Gupta & Anr. Vs Canara Bank & Ors. (Calcutta High Court)
The Calcutta High Court considered an appeal against an order dismissing a commercial suit under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC). The Trial Court had rejected the plaint on the ground that the suit was barred under Section 96 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) following initiation of proceedings under Section 95 of the IBC against the plaintiffs, who had executed personal guarantees in favour of a consortium of banks.
The appellants contended that the suit seeking declarations and perpetual injunctions regarding discharge and release of their personal guarantees had been instituted before the Section 95 proceedings were initiated. They argued that Order VII Rule 11(d) required the court to examine only the averments in the plaint and that subsequent events could not be relied upon to reject the suit. They also submitted that the declaratory reliefs sought fell within the jurisdiction of the Civil Court.
The respondent bank argued that the suit was barred under the IBC, that the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) had jurisdiction over the dispute, and that the appellants were bound by earlier proceedings. It further contended that the civil action was not maintainable in view of the IBC framework.
