https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375826 The HC held the civil court lacked jurisdiction and rejected the plaints, refusing relief to restrain encashment of the bank guarantees; the NCLT is the appropriate forum and encashment may proceed. The court found the plaintiff's conduct caused over three months' delay and substantial prejudice to creditors and the resolution process, so the bank guarantees constituted a genuine pre-estimate of loss. No order for reimbursement of BG amounts with interest was made, but the plaintiff was ordered to pay costs of Rs. 25,00,000 to the respondent bank within four weeks. en-us Fri, 22 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Sep 2025 16:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375826 The HC held the civil court lacked jurisdiction and rejected the plaints, refusing relief to restrain encashment of the bank guarantees; the NCLT is the appropriate forum and encashment may proceed. The court found the plaintiff's conduct caused over three months' delay and substantial prejudice to creditors and the resolution process, so the bank guarantees constituted a genuine pre-estimate of loss. No order for reimbursement of BG amounts with interest was made, but the plaintiff was ordered to pay costs of Rs. 25,00,000 to the respondent bank within four weeks. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 22 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375826