https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763734 In proceedings under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code against a personal guarantor, limitation runs from the demand-triggered default fixed by the contract of guarantee, not necessarily from the principal borrower's default; on that basis, the application was within time. The filing was also upheld because the signatory acted under the bank's internal delegation and authorised signing framework, so the objection to authority failed. The insolvency proceedings against the personal guarantors were therefore sustained without interference. en-us Wed, 18 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Dec 2024 09:00:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763734 In proceedings under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code against a personal guarantor, limitation runs from the demand-triggered default fixed by the contract of guarantee, not necessarily from the principal borrower's default; on that basis, the application was within time. The filing was also upheld because the signatory acted under the bank's internal delegation and authorised signing framework, so the objection to authority failed. The insolvency proceedings against the personal guarantors were therefore sustained without interference. Case-Laws IBC Wed, 18 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763734