Invocation of the guarantee was held to be a condition precedent...

Invocation of the guarantee was held to be a condition precedent to initiating insolvency proceedings against a personal guarantor; contractual terms of the deed govern guarantor liability and were not altered by a subsequent compromise or MoU, so settlement did not remove the need to invoke the guarantee. A demand notice in Form B without prior invocation cannot substitute as invocation; reliance on Rule 7(1) notice was rejected. Because the financial creditor failed to invoke the guarantee before issuing Form B, the Section 95 application was held maintainable only if invocation had occurred and the admission was set aside; appeals allowed.

---