TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (4) TMI 698
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed by the Appellant's bank in favour of the Registrar pursuant to order of 17th June 2003. In the alternative, the Appellant seeks release of all original bank guarantees issued by the Bank of Baroda, Bhaga Talav branch in favour of the Registrar of this Court and only retain the bank guarantee dated 17th August 2021 issued by Union Bank of India. 3. The undisputed fact is that pursuant to the filing of First Appeal in May 2003, vide order dated 17th June 2003, this Court granted stay to the impugned judgment and decree on the Appellant's furnishing bank guarantee for sum of Rs. 29,00,000/-, to be kept alive during the pendency and disposal of the Appeal. The Appellant is complying with the said order and bank guarantee was regularly renewed and is presently valid till 16th August 2025. 4. During the pendency of Appeal proceedings, on 24th June 2020, the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process was initiated against the Appellant under the provisions of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 [for short "IBC"] by National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmadabad [for short "NCLT"]. The Resolution Professional was appointed who invited claims as per the prescribed procedure. Vide order dated 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of this Court in Rajendra Prasad Bansal v. Reliance Communication Ltd (2023 SCC OnLine Bom 33). has been considered in the decision of Siti Networks Ltd. v. Rajiv Suri (supra) holding that judgment in the case of Rajendra Prasad Bansal v. Reliance Communication Ltd (supra) apply only to the parties in that case and that the statement of law contained therein has been overtaken by the Supreme Court's order in the matter of Siti Networks Ltd. v. Rajiv Suri (supra) permitting the withdrawal of bank guarantees. He would further submit that Respondent No.1's reliance on Bombay High Court Letters Patent, 1866 to contend that issue is required to be decided based on equities is entirely misplaced as the First Appeal arises from decree of Court and there is no scope for exercise of equity jurisdiction and in any event such discretion cannot be exercised in contravention of law. He submits that it is the Respondent No.1's own failure to file a claim within time in the IBC proceedings that has led to the debt being extinguished and therefore he cannot now seek to invoke equitable considerations before this Court. 7. Per contra Mr. Naphade, Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent woul....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the decree in favour of Respondent No.1 in a case where admittedly the Respondent No.1's claim is not part of Resolution Plan due to failure of Respondent No.1 to lodge its claim with the Resolution Professional. For that purpose it would be necessary to have a look at the relevant provisions of IBC. 11. Section 3(6) of IBC defines the expression "Claim" as under : "(6) "claim" means- (a) a right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, fixed, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured or unsecured; (b) right to remedy for breach of contract under any law for the time being in force, if such breach gives rise to a right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, fixed, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, secured or unsecured" 12. Section 2(10) of IBC defines the expression "creditor" to mean any person to whom a debt is owed and a financial creditor, an operational creditor, a secured creditor, an unsecured credit and a decree holder. Section 2(11) defines "debt" to mean a liability or obligation in respect of a claim which is due from any person and includes a financial debt and operational debt. 13. Conjoint reading of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Resolution Plan shall stand extinguished and no person will be entitled to initiate or continue any proceedings in respect of any such claim. As admittedly the Respondent's claim was not part of Resolution Plan, the claim stood extinguished upon approval of the Resolution Plan on 1st January, 2021 and an embargo is placed on initiation or continuation of any proceedings for executing the decree. 17. In view of the settled position of law, the Appellants have withdrawn the First Appeal and the Interim Application seeks relief of release of bank guarantees. The bank guarantees were submitted to secure the decree as condition of stay. The issue as to whether the bank guarantees constitute asset of the Corporate Debtor or not is immaterial as the debt itself stands extinguished and once the Respondent's debt stands extinguished, no right can be claimed by the Respondents in the bank guarantee. Permitting the Respondent No.1 to stake a right to the bank guarantees would amount to satisfying the debt of Respondent No.1 which is precisely prohibited, once the claim does not form part of the Resolution Plan. 18. The matter ought to have rested here. However, Mr. Naphade has relied upo....