Maintainability of personal guarantor insolvency application failed where guarantee invocation against the applicant was not shown.

An application by a personal guarantor under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was found not maintainable because the demand notice was addressed to the corporate debtor and another guarantor, not to the applicant, so invocation of the guarantee against the applicant was not established. The record also lacked relevant particulars needed to support maintainability, and no other material showed proper invocation of the guarantee for recovery. The resolution professional's report was not accepted as satisfactory on eligibility and maintainability. The application was therefore rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether an application under Section 94(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 by a personal guarantor was maintainable when the demand notice did not invoke the guarantee against the applicant and relevant particulars were not disclosed.

Analysis: The application was filed under Section 94(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 read with Rule 6(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority for IRP for Personal Guarantors to Corporate Debtor) Rules, 2019. The demand notice relied upon was addressed to the corporate debtor and another guarantor, but not to the applicant. On that basis, the guarantee was not shown to have been invoked against the applicant. No other material was placed to establish invocation of the guarantee for recovery. The record also reflected non-disclosure of relevant details, and the resolution professional's report was not accepted as satisfactory on eligibility and maintainability.

Conclusion: The application was held to be not maintainable and was rejected.

---