<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2019 (5) TMI 1585 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL CHENNAI BENCH, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380857</link>
    <description>A Section 7 insolvency petition was held maintainable against a corporate guarantor because liability under a guarantee for borrowings covered by the Code forms part of financial debt, and a corporate debtor may be proceeded against on default even where the underlying borrowers were a partnership firm and proprietary concerns. The limitation objection also failed because the principal borrowers acknowledged the accounts on 03.10.2016, extending limitation under the Limitation Act; prior Debt Recovery Tribunal proceedings did not themselves extend time. The insolvency application was therefore admitted with moratorium and appointment of an interim resolution professional.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 May 2019 09:56:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=573219" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (5) TMI 1585 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL CHENNAI BENCH, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380857</link>
      <description>A Section 7 insolvency petition was held maintainable against a corporate guarantor because liability under a guarantee for borrowings covered by the Code forms part of financial debt, and a corporate debtor may be proceeded against on default even where the underlying borrowers were a partnership firm and proprietary concerns. The limitation objection also failed because the principal borrowers acknowledged the accounts on 03.10.2016, extending limitation under the Limitation Act; prior Debt Recovery Tribunal proceedings did not themselves extend time. The insolvency application was therefore admitted with moratorium and appointment of an interim resolution professional.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380857</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>