2026 (6) TMI 585

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t. Vidhya. A.C., Smt. Kalliyani Krishna B., Shri. Amrith M.J., Smt. Isabell Manoj Shri. Rahul T. JUDGMENT The petitioner has filed the captioned writ petition seeking to challenge Ext.P13 issued by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Delhi. The petitioner states that the 3rd respondent herein obtained some credit facilities from the 1st respondent herein, of which the petitioner was the personal guarantor. The 1st respondent has initiated proceedings under the provisions of Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for short the 'IBC') before the NCLT, Delhi, read with provisions of Section 60 of the IBC. The petitioner states that in Ext.P1, the name of one Mathew George was shown as a personal guarantor, as again....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is as to whether the writ petition is maintainable before this Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner would invite the attention of this Court to Article 226(2) of the Constitution of India, permitting the institution of writ petitions, where a part of the cause of action has arisen in the State, to contend that, insofar as the credit facility has been obtained in the State of Kerala, the writ petition is maintainable in this Court. However, the learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent would invite the attention of this Court to the provisions of the IBC to contend that since the order at Ext.P13 has been issued not with reference to the credit facility obtained, but with reference to the provisions of the IBC, the question of....