https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355563 The Tribunal found that the Resolution Applicant was not disqualified under clauses (c) and (h) of Section 29A of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016. It clarified that since the guarantee had not been invoked, the Applicant could not be considered a defaulter. The Tribunal emphasized that disqualifying guarantors under clause (h) would be discriminatory. The Committee of Creditors was directed to independently decide on the Resolution Plan. The Company Application was decided to clarify the Applicant's eligibility, with instructions for further action by the CoC. en-us Mon, 11 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Feb 2018 09:25:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355563 The Tribunal found that the Resolution Applicant was not disqualified under clauses (c) and (h) of Section 29A of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016. It clarified that since the guarantee had not been invoked, the Applicant could not be considered a defaulter. The Tribunal emphasized that disqualifying guarantors under clause (h) would be discriminatory. The Committee of Creditors was directed to independently decide on the Resolution Plan. The Company Application was decided to clarify the Applicant's eligibility, with instructions for further action by the CoC. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Mon, 11 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355563