R SWARUP REDDY Vs. KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Application No. 216 of 2009 The epitome and the long and short of the germane facts, absolutely necessary for the disposal of this application would run thus: The Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited (the petitioning creditor in Insolvency Notice No. 35 of 2009) is a Banking Company registered under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. One Trans India Lamps Limited borrowed money from the State Bank of India for which, the respondent viz., R. Swarup Reddy (the respondent in Insolvency Notice No. 35 of 2009) stood as guarantor. The debt was not repaid. Whereupon, the State Bank of India approached the Debts Recovery Tribunal and got an order dated 27.10.2004, whereupon a Certificate of Recovery was also issued by the Debts Recovery Tribunal. Subsequently, the State Bank of India, the original creditor transferred the said debt in favour of the Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited as per the assignment deed dated 23.3.2006. Wherefore, the Debts Recovery Tribunal was approached, which also effected muttadis muttandis changes/amendments to the recovery Certificate indicating that the Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited stepped into the shoes of the State Bank of India. Thereafter, the Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, on understanding that the debt due was not discharged by R. Swarup Reddy, resorted to issuance of Insolvency Notice dated 23.4.2009 by invoking Section 9(2) of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909.

(2.) Whereupon the respondent in Insolvency Notice No. 35 of 2009 filed this application with the following prayer: "to pass an order setting aside the insolvency notice." The whole kit and caboodle of facts and the gist and kernel of the grounds on which the said prayer was made by Swarup Reddy. could be portrayed thus:

(3.) Refuting and remonstrating, challenging and impugning, the averments/allegations in the petition filed by Swarup Reddy, the Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited filed its counter justifying the action taken by them.