9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 1077X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here this court was pleased to issue warrant of arrest against judgement debtor No.1 through judgment debtor No. 2. Petitioner/judgement No.2 contended that judgment debtor No. 1 from 2012 started experiencing tremendous financial hardship and various legal proceedings were initiated against the judgment debtor No. 1 by it's various creditors. Eventually an application under section 7 of the Insolvency Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) was filed by Canara bank against judgment debtor No. 1 before National Company Law Tribunal, Hyderabad Branch (NCLT). Said IBC proceeding was eventually allowed on 19th July, 2017 resultantly moratorium under section 14 of the IBC also commenced from the same date and judgment debtor No. 2 was suspended from his di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 95 of the IBC for initiation of insolvency resolution process against the judgment debtor no. 2 as a personal guarantor of judgment debtor no. 1. Upon filing of section 95 application, interim moratorium under section 96 of the IBC commenced and all legal action and proceeding against the judgment debtor no.2 are deemed to be stayed. On 24th June, 2022 such application was allowed and moratorium was imposed and as such present execution proceeding deemed to be stayed. Thereafter judgment debtor no. 2 still continue to be participated in the hearing but he could not appear before the court on 18th November 2022 on which date order impugned was passed. He further submits that no affidavit of asset needs to be filed by the judgment debtor no.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ether the order impugned calls for any review or not. It is apparent from the order sheet that vide order dated 19th March, 2019, this court observed that since no appeal has been preferred from the decree in question there will be order in terms of prayer 'D' of the tabular statement and in the next order dated 2nd April 2019, this court was pleased to direct judgement debtor no. 2 to file affidavit of asset on behalf of the respondent no. 1 within four weeks from the date. Subsequently on 18th November, judgment debtor, while represented were again directed to submit affidavit of asset in terms of earlier order and it was further ordered that in default warrant of arrest may be issued against him. Such orders were never challenged. On the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
