SURAJ SHRINIWAS ZANWAR AND ORS vs IDBI BANK LTD — WP/7191/2026

Case under Securitisation & Reconstruction of Finiancial Assets Act Section NA. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 15th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM010246222026

Filing Number

WP/14509/2026

Filing Date

08-May-2026

Registration No

WP/7191/2026

Registration Date

09-Jun-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manish Pitale , Hon'ble Shri Justice Shreeram Vinayak Shirsat

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manish Pitale , Hon'ble Shri Justice Shreeram Vinayak Shirsat

Bench Type

Division

Category

MERCANTILE LAWS COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS , BANKS ( 28 )

Sub-Category

MATTERS RELATING TO SECURITISATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS ( 10 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

15-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed

Last updated 17-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Securitisation & Reconstruction of Finiancial Assets Act Section NA

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SURAJ SHRINIWAS ZANWAR AND ORS

    Adv. raval shah and company

  2. 2.PANKAJ SHRINIWAS ZANWAR

  3. 3.KAVITA SURAJ ZANWAR

  4. 4.SHEETAL P. ZANWAR

  5. 5.SHAKUNTALA SHRINIWAS ZANWAR

  6. 6.ABHISHEK BHANDARI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.IDBI BANK LTD

  2. 2.BANK OF BARODA

  3. 3.UNION OF INDIA

  4. 4.SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA

  5. 5.CIAN HEALTHCARE LTD

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Manish Pitale,hon'ble Shri Justice Shreeram Vinayak ShirsatView PDF

    Case Summary: WP/7191/2026 The Bombay High Court dismissed the petitioners' writ petition challenging IDBI Bank's right to pursue personal guarantors even after their corporate debtor's dues were satisfied under an NCLT-approved resolution plan. The court held that approval of a resolution plan does not automatically discharge personal guarantors' liabilities, as their obligation arises from an independent guarantee contract. Relying on Supreme Court precedent (*Lalit Kumar Jain v. Union of India*), the court ruled that involuntary discharge of a principal debtor through insolvency proceedings does not absolve guarantors of their co-extensive liability. The petitioners were permitted to raise grievances before the NCLT and resolution professional. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 15-Jun-2026

    Fresh Admission

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Manish Pitale , Hon'ble Shri Justice Shreeram Vinayak Shirsat

  4. 08-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/7191/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP/7191/2026 The Bombay High Court dismissed the petitioners' writ petition challenging IDBI Bank's right to pursue personal guarantors even after their corporate debtor's dues were satisfied under an NCLT-approved resolution plan. The court held that approval of a resolution plan does not automatically discharge personal guarantors' liabilities, as their obligation arises from an independent guarantee contract. Relying on Supreme Court precedent (*Lalit Kumar Jain v. Union of India*), the court ruled that involuntary discharge of a principal debtor through insolvency proceedings does not absolve guarantors of their co-extensive liability. The petitioners were permitted to raise grievances before the NCLT and resolution professional. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case