https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789160 Limitation for a Section 95 insolvency application runs from the disclosed date of default, which is a definite event under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, and Article 137 applies through Section 238A retrospectively. Pendency of arbitration or execution proceedings does not suspend that limitation, so an application filed after the crystallised default date was barred. The attempt to treat the loan documents and demand notice as creating a continuing guarantee under Section 129 of the Indian Contract Act failed because the facility was a single term loan, not a series of transactions, and no contractual term extended or shifted the default date. The personal guarantor insolvency admission was therefore set aside. en-us Thu, 02 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Apr 2026 08:53:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789160 Limitation for a Section 95 insolvency application runs from the disclosed date of default, which is a definite event under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, and Article 137 applies through Section 238A retrospectively. Pendency of arbitration or execution proceedings does not suspend that limitation, so an application filed after the crystallised default date was barred. The attempt to treat the loan documents and demand notice as creating a continuing guarantee under Section 129 of the Indian Contract Act failed because the facility was a single term loan, not a series of transactions, and no contractual term extended or shifted the default date. The personal guarantor insolvency admission was therefore set aside. Case-Laws IBC Thu, 02 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789160