PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
The NCLAT allowed the appeal and set aside the Adjudicating Authority's finding that Clause 33 capped the guarantor's entire liability at Rs.25 crore. The Tribunal held that Clause 33, interpreted by its plain contractual terms, limits only the principal guarantee quantum to Rs.25 crore; the guarantor remains separately liable for default interest arising from delayed discharge of guarantee obligations. The appellant's claim exceeding Rs.25 crore was not held to contravene Clause 33, and the Adjudicating Authority erred in conflating discharge of the principal borrower's liability with the guarantor's obligation to pay default interest. The impugned directions are quashed and the appeal is allowed.
The NCLAT allowed the appeal and set aside the Adjudicating Authority's finding that Clause 33 capped the guarantor's entire liability at Rs.25 crore. The Tribunal held that Clause 33, interpreted by its plain contractual terms, limits only the principal guarantee quantum to Rs.25 crore; the guarantor remains separately liable for default interest arising from delayed discharge of guarantee obligations. The appellant's claim exceeding Rs.25 crore was not held to contravene Clause 33, and the Adjudicating Authority erred in conflating discharge of the principal borrower's liability with the guarantor's obligation to pay default interest. The impugned directions are quashed and the appeal is allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.