38.6c New Delhi, India, Tuesday, August 05, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Business

Creditor Can Proceed Against Corporate Guarantor Before Proceeding Against The Corporate Debtor: NCLAT [Read Order]

By LawStreet News Network      11 January, 2019 12:00 AM      0 Comments
Creditor Can Proceed Against Corporate Guarantor Before Proceeding Against The Corporate Debtor: NCLAT [Read Order]

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) on January 8, 2019, has held that financial creditor can proceed against corporate guarantor even before proceeding against the corporate debtor.

A Bench comprising of Chairperson Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya and Member (Judicial) Justice Bansi Lal Bhat was hearing appeals filed by two companies - Sunrise Naturopathy and Resorts Pvt. Ltd. and Sunsystem Institute of Information Technology Pvt. Ltd.

The companies stood as guarantors to a loan amounting to Rs. 38,00,00,000/- advanced to All India Society for Advance Education and Research (Principal Borrower) by M/s. Piramal Enterprises Ltd (Financial Creditor).

When default occurred in repayment, the financial creditor filed applications for initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code against the two guarantors which NCLT admitted.

This action of NCLT was challenged by the two guarantors contending that Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process cannot be initiated against guarantors, without proceeding against the debtor.

It was also submitted that for the same set of claim amount and debt, two Corporate Insolvency Resolution Processes cannot be initiated against two different corporate guarantors.

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the financial creditor controverted the argument and said that both guarantors being separate entity and both guarantors having guaranteed for the same set of amount, even in absence of initiation of CIRP against the principal borrower, two separate applications under Section 7 can be filed against respective guarantors.

The questions arisen for consideration in these appeals are:

  1. Whether the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process can be initiated against a Corporate Guarantor, if the Principal Borrower is not a Corporate Debtor or Corporate Person? and;
  2. Whether the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process can be initiated against two Corporate Guarantors simultaneously for the same set of debt and default?

The Bench relying on several Supreme Court precedents held that the liability of guarantor is co-extensive with the liability of principal borrower. Thus answering the first question against the appellant.

The Bench said that we hold that it is not necessary to initiate 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process' against the 'Principal Borrower' before initiating 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process' against the 'Corporate Guarantors'. Without initiating any 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process' against the 'Principal Borrower', it is always open to the 'Financial Creditor' to initiate 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process' under Section 7 against the 'Corporate Guarantors', as the creditor is also the 'Financial Creditor' qua 'Corporate Guarantor'.

However, in regard to the second question, the Bench held that once an application under Section 7 is admitted, another application for the same debt cannot be filed. In this case, the applications under Section 7 were admitted against both the corporate guarantors. This was held to be an improper course of action by NCLT.

It was held that Once for same claim the 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process' is initiated against one of the 'Corporate Debtor' after such initiation, the 'Financial Creditor' cannot trigger 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process' against the other 'Corporate Debtor(s)', for the same claim amount (debt).

In view of the above, NCLAT quashed the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the second corporate guarantor.



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

bengaluru-court-convicts-ex-mp-prajwal-revanna-in-rape-case
Trending Judiciary
Bengaluru court convicts ex MP Prajwal Revanna in rape case

Bengaluru court convicts ex-MP Prajwal Revanna in rape case linked to explicit videos; one of four sexual abuse cases filed against him.

04 August, 2025 11:07 AM
sc-sets-aside-order-declaring-man-as-juvenile-on-basis-of-school-certificate
Trending Judiciary
SC sets aside order declaring man as juvenile on basis of school certificate [Read Judgment]

SC: School certificate from private school not valid proof of age, sets aside order declaring murder accused as juvenile.

04 August, 2025 11:24 AM

TOP STORIES

a-new-dawn-in-indias-criminal-justice-system-replacing-colonial-shackles-with-indigenous-legal-reforms
Trending Vantage Points
A New Dawn in India’s Criminal Justice System: Replacing Colonial Shackles with Indigenous Legal Reforms

This research paper examines India’s transition from IPC, CrPC, and IEA to BNS, BNSS, and BSA, emphasizing victim-centric and technology-driven justice reforms.

30 July, 2025 12:41 PM
your-conduct-does-not-inspire-confidence-sc-reserves-judgment-on-justice-yashwant-varmas-plea
Trending Judiciary
‘Your Conduct Does Not Inspire Confidence’: SC Reserves Judgment on Justice Yashwant Varma’s Plea

CJI can recommend removal of a judge in cases of grave misconduct, SC says; clarifies CJI isn’t a mere post office & Parliament has final say.

30 July, 2025 04:14 PM
cricket-stadium-would-be-required-sc-slams-tn-govt-again-for-roping-2000-accused-500-witnesses
Trending Judiciary
'Cricket stadium would be required,' SC slams TN govt again for roping 2000 accused, 500 witnesses in trial against Senthil Balaji

SC slams TN govt for implicating 2,000 accused & 500 witnesses in Senthil Balaji cash-for-jobs case, says trial needs a cricket stadium to fit all.

30 July, 2025 05:20 PM
accident-on-way-to-office-and-return-to-be-covered-for-compensation-under-ec-act-sc
Trending Judiciary
Accident on way to office and return to be covered for compensation under EC Act: SC [Read Judgment]

SC: Accidents while commuting to and from work covered under Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923; ruling gives retrospective effect to benefit employees.

30 July, 2025 05:28 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email