SUDIPA NATH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a practicing advocate and a resident of state of Tripura. The petitioner is before this court claiming public interest and no direct or indirect personal motive /interest and prays as follows:

(2.) The petitioner contended the frauds of gigantic proportion are being played by the corporate to defraud the gullible creditors to siphon off public money. He contended that introduction of Insolvency Bankruptcy Code (IBC) itself is in public interest. According to him, grant of the prayer made by him would serve public interest and would enable maximum recoveries under IBC for the creditors of a corporate debtor.

(3.) The petitioner further submitted that there is urgent need of passing appropriate directions as prayed for by him in the interest of justice. The prayers if granted would strengthen the framework for insolvency & bankruptcy and would cause immense benefit to the creditors at large who would be able to make higher recoveries.