- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15176 WP No. 13151 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 13151 OF 2023 (GM-DRT) BETWEEN: 1. M/S. JUPITER PUBLISHERS AND DISTRIBUTORS REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SMT PRASANNA KUMARI W/O SRI JUSTIN ULLAS KUMAR AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.40, VIDYASAGAR SARAYIPALYA ARABIC COLLEGE POST BANGALORE - 560 045 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MURALIDHAR S.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE REGISTRAR THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II B S N L BUILDING TELEPHONE HOUSE RAJ BHAVAN ROAD Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15176 WP No. 13151 of 2023 BENGALURU KARNATAKA - 560 001 2. THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI - 110 001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. ANUPAMA HEGDE, CGSC FOR R1 AND R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER VIDE DTD 17.03.2023 AS PLACED AT ANNX-A AND RESTORE IRP IR NO. 1/2022 FILED BEFORE THE REGISTRAR THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II BENGALURU AND DISPOSE THE IN SOLVENCY RESOLUTION APPLICATION ON MERITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15176 WP No. 13151 of 2023 ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers: “a) Issuing writ of certiorari setting aside the impugned order vide dated 17/03/2023 as placed at ANNEXURE-A and restore IRP IR NO. 1/2022 filed before the Registrar, the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Bengaluru and dispose the insolvency resolution application on merits in accordance with law. b) Issue the writ of mandamus to respondent no. 2 to issue gazette notification in order to implement the chapter 6 section 179 of the IBC, 2016; c) Any other relief this Hon'ble court feels deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. The petitioner is a medical book seller and due to the circumstantial pressure and substantial business losses, she has become insolvent and unable to discharge her debts. In view of her financial difficulties, the petitioner initially filed an - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15176 WP No. 13151 of 2023 Insolvency Petition before the Additional City Civil Court at Bengaluru in IC No. 19/2019 under Section 10(1)(a) of the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920. However, the said petition was rejected by order dated 03.01.2022 on the ground that the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 stood repealed. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the DRT. 3. The Respondent No.1/the Registrar DRT II, by order dated 17.03.2023, refused to register IRP IR No. 1/2022 filed before the DRT, Bengaluru, without affording an opportunity of hearing on the individual insolvency resolution application and without considering the memo of clarifications dated 24.02.2023 filed by the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said action, the petitioner has come before this Court by filing the instant writ petition. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, upon repeal of the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920, and the dismissal of the petition filed thereunder, the petitioner was left with no alternative remedy but to approach the DRT. However, the DRT has not considered the petitioner’s application solely on the ground that the Central Government - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15176 WP No. 13151 of 2023 has not notified the requisite notification bringing the relevant provisions into force. In view of the same, the petitioner has no efficacious alternative remedy and is constrained to approach this Court by filing the instant writ petition. 5. The learned counsel appearing for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 submits that alternative remedy to the petitioner is before the Civil Court. It is further submitted that the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for short ‘IBC’), come into force only on such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint: provided that that different dates may be appointed for different provisions of the Code and any reference in such provision to the commencement of the Code shall be construed in the reference to the commencement of that provision. 6. It is submitted that Section 179 of the IBC, 2016 has been notified, however, it relates only to personal guarantors to the corporate debtors, but it does not deal with the individual insolvency proceedings. It is further contended that, in the absence of a specific notification issued by the Central Government bringing the relevant provisions into force - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15176 WP No. 13151 of 2023 for individuals, the remedy available to the petitioner continues to lie under the Provincial Insolvency Act before the Civil Court. It is also submitted that the petitioner ought to have questioned the order passed by the Civil Court rejecting her application. It is submitted that the prayers sought before this Court are not maintainable and are liable to be dismissed. 7. Having heard the learned counsel on either side, perused the material on record. 8. The petitioner had filed Insolvency Case No. 19/2019 before the Additional City Civil Court, Bengaluru, seeking to declare as an insolvent, which came to be rejected by order dated 03.01.2022. The Civil Court, while rejecting the petition, observed that the IBC, 2016 had come into force with effect from 05.08.2016 and in view of Section 243 of the said Code, the Provincial Insolvency Act stood repealed, thereby holding that as the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition and that the petitioner ought to seek remedy under IBC, 2016. 9. This Court has perused the notifications issued by the Central Government from time to time, as well as the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15176 WP No. 13151 of 2023 objections raised by the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No. 2. It is not in dispute that Section 179 of the IBC has come into force with effect from 01.12.2019 by notification dated 15.11.2019 issued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, but only to the limited extent of its applicability to personal guarantors to corporate debtors. Admittedly, the provisions relating to individual insolvency have not yet been notified by the Central Government. 10. Unless and until the provisions with regard to individual insolvency petitions are notified by the Central Government, the petitioner cannot approach under the IBC and as long as the remedy is not provided to the party by way of the new Act. Where the new provisions under the new Act are not notified and under the repealed provisions, one cannot approach the Court. In these circumstances, as there is no remedy under the IBC Code pertaining to the petitioner’s individual insolvency proceedings until such notification is issued by the Central Government, her remedy is before the Civil Court. It is also an admitted fact that Section 243, which provides for repeal of the Act, has not been notified so far. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15176 WP No. 13151 of 2023 In these circumstances, the only remedy available to the petitioner is to approach the Civil Court and to question the order passed by the Civil Court before the appropriate Court. In that view of the matter, his Court deems it appropriate to pass the following: ORDER i. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, giving liberty to the petitioner to assail the order dated 03.01.2022 passed by the Civil Court, in accordance with law. ii. All pending IAs., if any, in the writ petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE SMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33