SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(NCLT) 521

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
SHRI JYOTI KUMAR TRIPATI, SHRI RAVICHANDRAN RAMASAMY, JJ
CS Bhaskar B Resolution Professional S.Ravindranathan VS
IA(I.B.C) - 506/2024



Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Baskaran

The Personal Guarantor is jointly and severally liable for the Corporate Debtor's debts under Section 128 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, allowing initiation of insolvency proceedings.

Headnote:(A) Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 95(1) - Personal Guarantor - Petition filed by Financial Creditor for initiating insolvency resolution process against Personal Guarantor of Corporate Debtor. Tribunal admitted Corporate Debtor into CIRP on 13.08.2019 and subsequently into dissolution on 12.07.2024. Financial Creditor claims total debt of Rs.36,50,28,970/- with the date of default on 06.03.2019. (Paras 1, 5, 11.10)

(B) Personal Guarantee - The Personal Guarantor is jointly and severally liable for the debts of the Corporate Debtor under Section 128 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Respondent failed to repay loan after demand notice, leading to initiation of insolvency proceedings. (Paras 11.9, 11.10)

Facts of the case:
The Financial Creditor filed a petition under IBC against the Personal Guarantor due to the Corporate Debtor's default in repayment of loans amounting to Rs.36,50,28,970/-. The Corporate Debtor was admitted into liquidation. (Paras 1, 5)

Findings of Court:
The Tribunal found that the Financial Creditor satisfied the requirements under Section 95 of the IBC, leading to the initiation of insolvency resolution process against the Personal Guarantor. (Paras 11.2, 11.10)

Issues: The main issues included the validity of the financial claims against the Personal Guarantor and the adherence to procedural requirements under IBC. (Paras 11.2, 11.9)

Ratio Decidendi: The Tribunal ruled that the liability of the Personal Guarantor is co-extensive with that of the Corporate Debtor, affirming the creditor's rights under the IBC. (Paras 11.9, 11.10)

Result: The application for insolvency resolution process against the Personal Guarantor is admitted.

ORDER

(Hearing through hybrid mode

1. The present Petition has been filed under Section 95(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as “Code/IBC, 2016") r/w Rule 7(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority for Insolvency Resolution Process for Personal Guarantors to Corporate Debtors) Rules, 2019 by State Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as “Financial Creditor”) for initiating insolvency resolution process against Mrs. Mr. S. Ravindranathan (hereinafter referred to as “Personal Guarantor”) of MPL Cars Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as “Corporate Debtor”).

2. This Tribunal vide order dated 13.08.2019 in CP/855/IB/2018 admitted the Corporate Debtor into CIRP and subsequently vide order dated 12.07.2024 into Dissolution.

3. Part – I of the application shows the details of the SBI/ Financial Creditor. The registered address is located at SBI, Stressed Asset Management Branch, Red Cross Building, Montieh Road, Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.

4. Part-II of the application shows the details of the Personal Guarantor. The Personal Guarantor/ Respondent stood as a personal guarantor in respect of the loans availed by MPL Cars Private Limited. The address of the Personal Guarantor / Respondent is F1, Abul Regency, 1st Floor, No.6, South Mada Street, Srinagar Colony, Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015 and also residing at Old No.10, New No.15/17, North Cresent Road, T. Nagar, Chennai -620 017.

5. Part – III of the application shows that the SBI/ Financial Creditor has given the value of total debt as Rs.36,50,28,970/- (Rupees Thirty six Crore fifty lakh twenty eight thousand and nine seventy only) covering Principal amount together with interest as on 07.10.2020 and the Date of Default is specified as 06.03.2019.

6. Part – IV of the Application gives the details of the Resolution Professional and the SBI/ Financial Creditor has proposed Mr. V Sadhasivam as the Insolvency Resolution Professional in respect of the Personal Guarantor/Respondent.

7. Financial Creditors Submissions

7.1 SBI/Financial Creditor submitted that it had advanced cash credit loan facilities by means of e-DFS (Electronic Dealer Finance Scheme) to a tune of Rs.35 Crores vide sanction letter dated 25.01.2012 to the Corporate Debtor company namely M/s. MPL Cars Private Limited. On 05.12.2012, the Corporate Debtor was sanctioned with adhoc additional Cash Credit e-DFS to a tune of Rs.7 crores.

7.2 It is submitted that Corporate Debtor has sought for renewal of existing credit facility and the same was renewed at an existing level on 03.12.2013. On 28.04.2015 the Financial Creditor, after taking into the consideration the financial position of the Corporate Debtor, renewed the credit facility and accordingly reduced the limit from Rs.35 Crores to Rs.25 Crores.

7.3 On 30.09.2015 the SBI has again sanctioned a temporary loan facility of Rs.5 Crores for a period of three months for purchasing new vehicle models as per the Corporate Debtor’s request letter dated 22.09.2015. The Corporate Debtor’s concerned credit facility account has become inactive from 26.11.2015 due to non-routing of sale proceeds of Nov 2015 to SBI e-DFS Account. The Corporate Debtor has also failed to repay the Adhoc amount of Rs.5 Crores supposed to be paid before 31.12.2015. On 07.05.2016, vide a sanction letter Financial Creditor has reduced the existing credit facilities by reducing the limit from Rs.30 Crores to Rs.25 Crores subject to specific condition of bringing the collateral security.

7.4 The Corporate Debtor has offered an immovable property belonging to one of the guarantor Mr. S Ashok as collateral security by creating an equitable mortgage by deposit of title deeds which was executed on 19.05.2016 and registered as Doc. No. 1655/2016 with SRO Mylapore.

7.5 It is submitted that, despite several opportunities given, the Corporate Debtor neither revamp the business operations, nor has repaid the sales amount which lead to credit facility b

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top