Essel Group founder Subhash Chandra has strongly pushed back against reports of a ₹22,000 crore personal insolvency claim, clarifying that he acted strictly as a guarantor rather than a primary borrower #Zee #NCLT #Insolvency #SubhashChandra

IBC is a safe exit for defaulting corporates. IBC had not served public interest and therefore it is to be scraped immediately. The common man cannot see defaulters escaping in a lawful manner when he is hounded by the goons hired by banks which come under the definition of “State” under Article 12 of our Constitution. It is unfortunate that “State” sponsored goons harass farmers, home loan borrowers and even those who pledge their own gold to raise money out of insufficient income to meet both the ends. It is to be remembered that our Constitution guarantees equality before law. “Defaulter Pays” should be the rule. We see in newspapers, notices published by banks involving guarantors also under SARFAESI Act. Recovery process should not define borrowers and guarantors separately. Both are responsible for repayment. It is time to think whether we are ruled by “Rule of Law” or by “Ruler’s whims and fancies”.

Guarantor is like a coborrower

is there a secondary borrower and what is the liability for that category?

Masterclass in Victimhood — sponsored by Power & Privilege. 🍿

But how NCLT entertain claim if as per his knowledge borrowers have paid back full money

In case of loan default liability of guarantor is as good as a borrower.

When the company is doing good, every promoter treat this as their personal business and fly high and often the costs of their family splurge are often absorbed by the company. When the business fails, they distance themselves from. Funny to say ‘rather than a primary borrower’

Kewal 3900 crore 🤣 dedo fir bhaiya