Wadhawan, Dhoot may lose assets as banks move to invoke personal guarantees, BFSI News, ET BFSI

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


The business tycoons whose bankrupt companies have been sold for a small fraction of the loans they owed may not be let off easily.

Lenders are in the process of appointing advisors to arrive at a fair value of their assets following the Supreme Court’s order on invoking personal guarantees of defaulting promoters.

Banks are assessing the value of assets held by promoters of at least 40 companies that are under the insolvency process, according to a report.

The promoters whose value of assets is being determined include Kapil and Dheeraj Wadhwan of DHFL; Videocon promoters Venugopal and Rajkumar Dhoot; Lanco Infratech’s Madhusudhan Rao and family, IVRCL’s Sudhir Reddy and Jatin Mehta of Winsome Diamonds.

Armed with the Supreme Court go-ahead to seize assets of personal guarantors, banks are looking to recover money parked in family trusts.

Many of the family trusts created by businesspeople are meant primarily to protect their assets from potential claims related to their companies, such as in bankruptcies. Neither lenders nor agencies such as the Enforcement Directorate or income tax department have been able to penetrate these asset protection trusts.

The SC verdict

The Supreme Court had upheld the validity of the Centre’s notification allowing banks to proceed against personal guarantors for recovery of loans given to a company under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC).

A bench comprising justices L Nageswara Rao and S Ravindra Bhat held that approval of resolution plan under the IBC does not discharge personal guarantors of their liability towards the banks.

“In the judgment, we have upheld the notification,” Justice Bhat said while reading out the conclusion of the judgement which decided as many as 75 petitions pertaining to the validity of the notification.

Petitioners had challenged the November 15, 2019 notification issued under the IBC and other provisions in as far as they relate to personal guarantors to corporate debtors.

Upholding the validity of the notification, the top court ruled that initiation of an insolvency resolution plan for a company does not absolve corporate guarantees given by individuals from paying up the dues to financial institutions.

The IBC law

Under the IBC law, banks can go after the family trusts formed by promoters or those who have given personal guarantees, provided there is a fraud or siphoning of money involved as per provisions of the IBC.

Promoters of several Indian companies had earlier accused their professional managers of fraud and diverting company funds. But they would not get any respite from the IBC as lenders will now invoke their personal guarantees.

SBI action

SBI was one of the respondents to the 74 petitions and challenges by promoters on invocation of personal guarantees. It has been in the forefront of invoking guarantees of promoters of defaulting companies. It had invoked Rs 1200 crore of guarantees given by Ambani for defaulting companies Reliance Communications and Reliance Infratel.

In January SBI had also approached the Mumbai bench of the NCLT to initiate invoking guarantees by the Videocon Industries Dhoot brothers totalling Rs 11,500 crore.

It had also taken Bhushan Power & Steel promoter Sanjay Singal to court to recover Rs 12,276 crore dues to the bank for which he was a guarantor. All these promoters had challenged these actions in court.



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Banks eye sureties of ₹1.8-lakh cr

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


Personal guarantees amounting to ₹1.8-lakh crore given by promoters of as many as 42 defaulting corporate entities could now be invoked by banks following the Supreme Court order.

This is likely to include Kapil and Dheeraj Wadhwan of DHFL (₹79,344 crore); Videocon promoters Venugopal and Rajkumar Dhoot (₹22,076 crore); Lanco Infratech’s Madhusudhan Rao and family (₹5,253 crore); IVRCL’s Sudhir Reddy (₹7,058 crore); and Jatin Mehta of Winsome Diamonds (₹6,185 crore), according to a PIL filed in the Supreme Court.

‘Concurrent proceedings’

Legal experts said that creditors can now initiate concurrent insolvency proceedings against the corporate debtor and the personal guarantors. Abhay Itagi, Principal Associate at law firm MV Kini, said the personal guarantors, invariably promoters, shall be liable for their flawed decisions and hopefully appropriate provisions will be inserted for simultaneous insolvency proceedings against the promoter(s) and the company.

On November 15, 2019, the Government, through a Gazette notification, had made a new provision in the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, giving banks the right to move an application for initiation of insolvency proceedings against personal guarantors to corporate debtors.

 

Promoters accountable

This was aimed at making promoters accountable for the defaulted loan because the recovery of debt by selling companies through the insolvency process has been low.

But the new provision was challenged by many promoters before different High Courts, claiming that promoters alone should not be held liable for the default on debt repayment.

Banking expert V Viswanathan said that the top court’s decision to uphold the Government’s notification will help banks recover more from stressed accounts. “There is a haircut whether through a resolution plan or liquidation. So, for the balance amount, the banks will now proceed against promoters.”

“Promoters who were not cooperating or trying to reduce the settlement amount by playing dirty tricks will come forward and help creditors get a better price realisation from the corporate assets (otherwise his personal assets will be attached for the balance amount),” Viswanathan said adding that the court ruling will also make promoters wary of extending personal guarantees unless they are confident of the business.

Faisal Sherwani, Partner, L&L Partners, said banks can invoke promoters guarantee even in cases where the company has been sold off under the IBC. This could spell trouble for former promoters of companies like Essar Steel and Bhushan Power.

Independent contract

“The liability of the personal debtor arises from an independent contract and the fate of the company would not ipso facto absolve the surety or personal guarantors,” Sherwani said.

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY