Authority: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Chennai (Justice N. Seshasayee - Member (Judicial) and Jatindranath Swain - Member (Technical))
Order Date: 30 July 2026
Case Overview
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) heard two connected appeals - Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No.192/2026 filed by Madhusudan Khemka and Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No.193/2026 filed by R Sundaresh. Both appellants are challenging an order passed by the adjudicating authority (NCLT) under Section 100 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC).
The appellants strongly dispute their status as personal guarantors to Canara Bank (Respondent 1), contending that the very document of guarantee is forged. The background reveals that Canara Bank had previously moved the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) in OA No. 801/2019 relying on the same deed of guarantee. When the DRT required the bank to prove the document's genuineness, the bank promptly withdrew the DRT proceeding and instead moved the NCLT with a petition under Section 95 of IBC.
The appellants argue that the learned adjudicating authority (NCLT), in the impugned order, admitted the petition under Section 100 without properly addressing the conduct of the bank or asserting the genuineness of the appellants' signatures, which they have consistently disputed.
Final Outcome
The NCLAT heard the appellants' arguments and has directed the appellants to submit a short note of submissions. The matter has been adjourned and listed for further hearing on 06 August 2026 at 12:45 PM under the caption 'Part Heard'. No final decision has been rendered at this stage.
Topics: Personal Guarantee, IBC Proceedings, Document Forgery Allegation