https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765563 A creditor could invoke personal insolvency against a guarantor under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code where the guarantee and restructuring documents showed enforcement for the benefit of the lenders, despite execution through a security trustee and no direct privity. The limitation objection failed because the valid demand on the guarantor and the guarantor's acknowledgment of liability through the revival letter triggered time, so the application was filed within limitation. Pending disputes and counterclaims did not prevent the debt from being treated as crystallised for initiation of personal insolvency proceedings. No procedural prejudice was shown from the absence of directions for negotiations under Section 100(2), so the admission of the insolvency process was upheld. en-us Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Feb 2025 08:46:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765563 A creditor could invoke personal insolvency against a guarantor under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code where the guarantee and restructuring documents showed enforcement for the benefit of the lenders, despite execution through a security trustee and no direct privity. The limitation objection failed because the valid demand on the guarantor and the guarantor's acknowledgment of liability through the revival letter triggered time, so the application was filed within limitation. Pending disputes and counterclaims did not prevent the debt from being treated as crystallised for initiation of personal insolvency proceedings. No procedural prejudice was shown from the absence of directions for negotiations under Section 100(2), so the admission of the insolvency process was upheld. Case-Laws IBC Thu, 23 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765563