The National Company Law Tribunal has accepted the SBI application invoking the personal guarantee case against Videocon promoter Venugopal Nandlal Dhoot in the ₹6,158 crore loan default by the company to the bank in 2018.

The Videocon Telecommunications and Videocon Industries availed various loans for working capital from SBI in 2010 and 2012. Being the promoter of these companies, Dhoot had provided a personal guarantee for these loans. In 2018, the bank had sent demand notice to both companies on default of their loans and moved NCLT.

In 2019, NCLT allowed consolidation of the corporate insolvency resolution process of VIL. SBI had earlier initiated insolvency proceedings against Videocon group firms, with its admitted claims of over ₹4,671 crore. In fact, the corporate insolvency resolution proceedings of the Videocon Group companies are presently pending.

Accepting the petition invoking personal guarantee, NCLT said the case will cease to have effect at the end of 180 days, or this Tribunal passes order before that. During the moratorium period any pending legal action or proceeding in respect of any debt will be deemed to have been stayed, and lenders cannot initiate any legal action on defaulted debt.

The debtor cannot transfer, alienate, encumber, or dispose of any of his assets or his legal rights, it added.

NCLT directed the resolution professional, Asish Narayan to collect the claims of lenders in 21 days and call for meeting of creditors in 28 days.

Sonam Chandwani, Managing Partner, KS Legal & Associates, said that though it is unlikely that a promoter of this scale would retain substantial assets in his individual name after prolonged financial stress, the current regime allows scrutiny of past transactions and reversal of suspect transfers, which may still yield recovery.

The delay since 2018 is attributable to the staggered implementation of the regime and initial jurisdictional challenges, she said.

However, currently the admission standards are clearer, liability of the guarantor is treated as co extensive and independent and insolvency professionals are actively examining transactions to identify preferential, undervalued or fraudulent transfers. The recovery has been strengthened by enabling discovery and potential clawback of assets rather than limiting creditors to disclosed holdings, said Chandwani.

Ketan Mukhija, Partner and Co Head, PE & VC, Kochhar & Co said the inclusion of personal guarantors in the IBC framework created a parallel and creditor-driven insolvency mechanism directly against promoters, independent of the corporate debtor’s CIRP.

This allows creditors to proceed simultaneously against both the company and its guarantors, thereby widening the recovery pool and increasing pressure on promoters, he said.

IBC allows creditors to proceed with attachment of personal assets, freeze accounts and enforce security even while insolvency proceedings are ongoing, thereby converting the process from a largely procedural exercise into a real-time recovery mechanism, he said.

Published on April 13, 2026