JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Narula, J. The Petitioner, who stood as a guarantor to a loan facility, is aggrieved with the recovery action initiated by the bank, against the borrower and himself, under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. According to him, once a resolution plan qua the borrower was approved under Section 31 of the under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, the bank's claims stood addressed. Thus, it could not have sought recovery for amounts over and above the amount approved by the NCLT, and seeks a mandamus to that effect. Is the petition maintainable for the above reliefs, is the short question before this court.

2. Briefly stated, Mr. Sanjay Sarin [`Petitioner'], stood as a guarantor to a loan of Rs.34 crores advanced by Canara Bank (formerly known as Syndicate Bank) [`Respondent No. 1'] to the borrower - Alphabet Heights Pvt. Ltd. (formerly known as Maple Realcon Private Ltd.) [`Respondent No. 3']. Subsequently, corporate insolvency resolution proceedings [`CIRP'] under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 [`IBC'] were initiated against Respondent No. 3 (which became the corporate debtor) in 20