oppn parties Loan Default: Personal Guarantees Can Be Invoked Even If IBC Proceedings Have Begun, Says Supreme Court

News Snippets

  • Maratha quota bill likely to be tabled in Maharashtra assembly today
  • Arvind Kejriwal skips ED summons for the 6th time, says the case is in court and will follow court's decision
  • PM Modi says UP has gone from 'red tape' to 'red carpet' in 7 years of 'double engine' government
  • Farm unions reject government offers, to resume Delhi march from today
  • Centre says some Aadhar cards in Bengal 'deactivated' due to technical glitz, will be activated back soon
  • Supreme Court stays LS privilege panel summons to Bengal officials over BJP MP Sukanta Majumdar injury case
  • Supreme Court junks Sandeshkhali petition, says it cannot be compared to Manipur, asks petitioner to approach Calcutta HC
  • Supreme Court gets tough on Chandigarh mayoral elections, asks for ballot papers and video footage, does not order re-election
  • Government starts withdrawing old small tax demands, up to Rs 25000 per entry till FY 2009-10 and up to Rs 10000 per entry from FY 2010-11 to FY 2014-15 with an overall ceiling of Rs 1 lakh per tax payer
  • Stocks remained positive on Monday: Sensex gained 281 points to 72708 and Nifty 81 points to 22122
  • Jasprit Bumrah likely to be rested for 4th Test while K L Rahul may be back
  • FIH Pro League hockey: India beat Spain 8-7 in shootout
  • SP leader Salim Sherwani, miffed at no Muslim candidate given RS ticket, quits party
  • Army going for big (Rs 57000cr) upgrade in combat vehicles to replace T-72 tanks
  • Mamata Banerjee says the BJP is doing nothing to resolve the Sandeshkhali dispute but instead fanning the fires to escalate it
History created in Supreme Court as Chandigarh mayoral poll ballots counted in court, judges declare AAP candidate Kuldeep Kumar winner after taking into account the votes defaced by returning officer Anil Masih
oppn parties
Loan Default: Personal Guarantees Can Be Invoked Even If IBC Proceedings Have Begun, Says Supreme Court

By Sunil Garodia
First publised on 2021-05-22 13:22:08

About the Author

Sunil Garodia Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator.

The Supreme Court has ruled that despite insolvency proceedings starting under the IBC, the personal guarantees of promoters and others, given in availing loans, will stand and creditors will be able to invoke them to recover their dues. The case came up before the court as promoters of several companies that have gone into bankruptcy proceedings challenged the legality of a government circular that allowed banks to invoke their personal guarantees. The court upheld the validity of the said notification. The court order covers guarantors, co-guarantors and co-obligators.

This was necessary for two main reasons. First, when the companies promoted by these entrepreneurs avail loans (sometimes huge amounts just on the basis of a project without corresponding asset value that covers the loan amount), the lenders sanction them such loans on the basis of the promoter's standing, reputation and personal wealth. Hence, when promoters borrows for their company by providing personal guarantees, they are in effect letting the lender know that in case the company fails to repay the loan, they would make it good from their personal assets. That is the level of confidence the promoters have in their project and that is why they are willing to put their personal wealth on line. It needs to be understood that this forms a major part in the calculations of the lenders. Hence when the company goes bust and is unable to repay the loan, regardless of the fact whether IBC proceedings have begun or not, the personal guarantees of the promoters must always be invoked. It is not as if they can avail of the good times and wash their hands off when things go bad.

Secondly, while it is not true of all promoters, it is often seen that the personal wealth of promoters of rogue companies keeps on increasing while the companies promoted by them and recipients of huge public money in the form of bank loans keep sinking. It is very difficult to prove any connection between the two but it is not unheard of for promoters to indulge in all kinds of financial skullduggery to bleed these companies dry. In that case too, promoters who have provided personal guarantees need to be held to account and lenders are entitled to recover their dues from their personal wealth.

This order is likely to have a sobering effect on promoters who provide personal guarantees hoping that they will never be invoked once the IBC proceedings start. This was a grey area in the IBC and the Supreme Court order has now set things right. It will also allow banks to make more informed lending decisions as they now have legal backing to invoke such guarantees even if the companies go bankrupt and the IBC is brought into play by creditors.