NCLAT upheld the maintainability of the Section 95 IBC application against the personal guarantor and dismissed the appeal. It held that the limitation period could not be confined to the 2017 loan recall notice, as the creditor-corporate debtor relationship continued through arbitration, CIRP, and a 2019 settlement recorded in judicial proceedings. Defaults under the settlement revived and re-acknowledged the original debt, with part-payments extending limitation and a fresh demand notice in 2022 crystallising default against the guarantor, rendering the Section 95 filing timely. The Tribunal further held that the later settlement did not extinguish or substitute the continuing guarantee, nor discharge the guarantor under Section 133.
NCLAT upheld the maintainability of the Section 95 IBC application against the personal guarantor and dismissed the appeal. It held that the limitation period could not be confined to the 2017 loan recall notice, as the creditor-corporate debtor relationship continued through arbitration, CIRP, and a 2019 settlement recorded in judicial proceedings. Defaults under the settlement revived and re-acknowledged the original debt, with part-payments extending limitation and a fresh demand notice in 2022 crystallising default against the guarantor, rendering the Section 95 filing timely. The Tribunal further held that the later settlement did not extinguish or substitute the continuing guarantee, nor discharge the guarantor under Section 133.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
