https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100355 NCLAT upheld recall of the loan facilities under the material adverse effect clause, holding that the lender could contractually form the opinion that the arrest of a personal guarantor and criminal investigation were likely to affect performance, so the recall was valid. It also held that the Section 7 applications were maintainable despite a pending challenge to the arbitral award and parallel execution, because the pleaded default began on failure to repay after recall and continued thereafter; insolvency proceedings are not barred merely because recovery steps were also taken. The tribunal further held that the arbitral award gave rise to a fresh limitation period, so the application filed within three years was not time-barred. en-us Tue, 02 Jun 2026 08:47:14 +0530 Tue, 02 Jun 2026 08:47:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100355 NCLAT upheld recall of the loan facilities under the material adverse effect clause, holding that the lender could contractually form the opinion that the arrest of a personal guarantor and criminal investigation were likely to affect performance, so the recall was valid. It also held that the Section 7 applications were maintainable despite a pending challenge to the arbitral award and parallel execution, because the pleaded default began on failure to repay after recall and continued thereafter; insolvency proceedings are not barred merely because recovery steps were also taken. The tribunal further held that the arbitral award gave rise to a fresh limitation period, so the application filed within three years was not time-barred. Highlights IBC Tue, 02 Jun 2026 08:47:14 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100355