If a corporate debtor and the surety are undergoing CIRP, then the IBC does not prevent a creditor to file claims in both CIRPs. Whether the creditor recovers more money than is due to it is immaterial under the IBC. The creditor is immune from allegations of unjust enrichment in such situations.
In ICICI Bank Limited v Era Infrastructure (India) Ltd 2026 INSC 201, the Supreme Court clarified that a right to simultaneous remedy is available to a creditor. But a contract of guarantee does not entitle the creditor to recover more than is due to it. And on recovery of one portion of claims in one CIRP, it should revise its claim in the other CIRP.