HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1354 of 2025 (M/S) Multiwal Pulp and Board Mills Private Limited ….....Petitioner Versus State Bank of India and others .….Respondents Present:- Mr. Harshpal Sekhon, Advocate for the petitioner. None appears for the respondent no. 1. Mr. Ashish Verma, Advocate for the respondent no. 2. JUDGMENT Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is a private limited company in the name of “Multiwal Pulp and Board Mills Private Limited”; the property of the petitioner company includes the land situated at Khasra Nos. 1/2/3 min, village Sand Khera, Tehsil Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, admeasuring 3.1000 hectares; Khasra Nos. 1/2/3 are an undivided land; total area is admeasuring 7.146 hectares, out of which 3.1000 hectares land is in the name of the petitioner company and 4.0460 hectares land is in the name of the respondent no. 3. The respondent no. 3, according to the petitioner, had pledged his property with the respondent no. 1, the State Bank of India, with respect to which now auction proceedings have been initiated by the respondent no. 2 under the directions of the National Company Law Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (“the NCLT”). It is the claim of the petitioner that the property has yet not been divided, therefore, until the property is divided, auction proceedings may not be done. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that Khasra Nos. 1/2/3, is undivided land of the petitioner and the respondent no. 3, which is admeasuring 7.146 hectares; therefore, until the land is demarcated, auction of the land belonging to the respondent no. 3 admeasuring 4.0460 hectares may not be initiated. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2, Bankruptcy Trustee, would submit that the property of the petitioner is not at all being auctioned. He would submit that the proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“the IB Code”) were initiated as the petitioner made default in repayment of loan; a resolution plan was finally prepared and approved by the NCLT; thereafter under Section 95 of the IB Code, the proceedings were initiated against the respondent no. 3, who is a guarantor in the transaction; when the plan was not approved, the respondent no. 1 made an application under Section 121 of the IB Code, therefore the Bankruptcy Trustee put the property of the respondent no. 3 to auction. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 would also submit that in the auction proceedings the successful resolution applicant, namely, M/s Marinaindia Traexim Private Limited had also participated. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 gives a categorical statement that no land belonging to the petitioner is put to auction; the land, which is put to auction is the land belonging to the respondent no. 3, who was a guarantor in the transaction. Even otherwise, it is argued that the proceedings were initiated before the NCLT, therefore, if the petitioner has any grievance, he could raise the grievance before the NCLT. He would submit that the writ is not an appropriate remedy. 3 6. In fact, the auction notice, which is Annexure 4 to the writ petition, categorically reveals that the property put to auction is the property belonging to the respondent no. 3 and not belonging to the petitioner. It is stated on behalf of the respondent no. 2 that the auction has already been completed; 25 % amount has already been deposited by the bidder and the proceedings are underway so as to confirm the sale. He would submit that there is no dispute with regard to demarcation of the land of the petitioner and the respondent no. 3. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the writ petition may be disposed of in light of the statements made by the learned counsel for the respondent no. 2. 8. Since, a statement has been given by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no land belonging to the petitioner is being auctioned, nothing survives in the writ petition. 9. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly, at the admission stage itself. (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 13.05.2025 Avneet/