<?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>2026 (3) TMI 1436 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788681</link>
    <description>A notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act invoked the personal guarantee because it expressly called on the guarantor to discharge liability, and that invocation fixed the commencement of limitation. A clear acknowledgment of debt in the corporate debtor&#039;s financial statements attracted Section 18 of the Limitation Act and gave rise to a fresh limitation period, which also operated for the guarantor&#039;s benefit. Parallel SARFAESI recovery steps did not displace the insolvency remedy. The Section 95 petition was therefore within limitation and maintainable, and the insolvency proceedings against the personal guarantors were allowed to continue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 09:07:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=893021" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (3) TMI 1436 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788681</link>
      <description>A notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act invoked the personal guarantee because it expressly called on the guarantor to discharge liability, and that invocation fixed the commencement of limitation. A clear acknowledgment of debt in the corporate debtor&#039;s financial statements attracted Section 18 of the Limitation Act and gave rise to a fresh limitation period, which also operated for the guarantor&#039;s benefit. Parallel SARFAESI recovery steps did not displace the insolvency remedy. The Section 95 petition was therefore within limitation and maintainable, and the insolvency proceedings against the personal guarantors were allowed to continue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788681</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>