Creditor can’t be allowed to pursue proceedings u/s 19(3) of RDDBFI Act, 1993 for recovery of loan amount taken by debtor (in liquidation) before DRT against the guarantors when NCLT has already issued moratorium under Sec. 14 of the IBC, 2016 & stayed proceedings in respect of the Debtor- Sanjeev Shriya Vs. State Bank of India & 6 Oths.- Allahabad High Court

Creditor can not be allowed to pursue proceedings under Section 19 (3) of  Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 for recovery of loan amount taken by the debtor (in liquidation) before Debt Recovery Tribunal against the guarantors when NCLT has already issued moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC, 2016 and stayed proceedings in respect of the debtors (in liquidation).

Related Posts:

When a Court has to decide whether a person has really guaranteed the due performance of the contract by the principal debtor, all the circumstances concerning the transaction will have to be necessarily considered. Court cannot adopt a hyper technical attitude that the guarantor has not signed the agreement and so he cannot be saddled with the liability-P.J. Rajappan Vs. Associated Industries (Pvt.) Ltd. & another – Kerala High Court

Case Laws-SARFAESI-High Courts, IBC-Case Laws-High Courts, Indian Contract Act-Case Laws

A scheme sanctioned by the Court u/s 391 & 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 was binding on the creditors whether such creditors assented to it or not. A contract between the creditor and the principal debtor by which the creditor compounds with the principal debtor, discharges the surety-Shri Kundanmal Dabriwala Vs. Haryana Financial Corporation and another -Punjab & Haryana High Court

Case Laws-SARFAESI-High Courts, Companies Act-High Courts, IBC-Case Laws-High Courts, Indian Contract Act-Case Laws
Scroll to Top