Application by debtor to initiate insolvency resolution process
Section 94 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 deals with application by debtor to initiate insolvency resolution process. A debtor who commits a default may apply, either personally or through a resolution professional, to the Adjudicating Authority for initiating the insolvency resolution process, by submitting an application. The Act was enacted on 28 May 2016.
(1) A debtor who commits a default may apply, either personally or through a resolution professional, to the Adjudicating Authority for initiating the insolvency resolution process, by submitting an application.
(2) Where the debtor is a partner of a firm, such debtor shall not apply under this Chapter to the Adjudicating Authority in respect of the firm unless all or a majority of the partners of the firm file the application jointly.
(3) An application under sub-section (1) shall be submitted only in respect of debts which are not excluded debts.
(4) A debtor shall not be entitled to make an application under sub-section (1) if he is—
(a) an undischarged bankrupt;
(b) undergoing a fresh start process;
(c) undergoing an insolvency resolution process; or
(d) undergoing a bankruptcy process.
(5) A debtor shall not be eligible to apply under sub-section (1) if an application under this Chapter has been admitted in respect of the debtor during the period of twelve months preceding the date of submission of the application under this section.
(6) The application referred to in sub-section (1) shall be in such form and manner and accompanied with such fee as may be prescribed.
Section 94, The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Act 31 of 2016).
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Sanjay Singal vs Union of India
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The impugned notification dated 15.11.2019 bringing into force provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 only in so far as they relate to personal guarantors to corporate debtors is a valid exercise of power conferred by Section 1(3) of the Code. The Central Government acted within its constitutional powers in selectively applying Code provisions to personal guarantors as a distinct category of individuals, as this classification was created by Parliament through the 2018 Amendment Act which amended Section 2(e) and Section 60 to provide unified adjudication of corporate debtors and personal guarantors before the NCLT. The notification does not constitute impermissible delegation of legislative power or excessive modification of statutory provisions, but rather operationalizes the Parliamentary intent to treat personal guarantors differently from other individuals due to their intrinsic connection with corporate debtors. Approval of a resolution plan relating to a corporate debtor does not operate to discharge the liabilities of personal guarantors to such corporate debtors, as the guarantor's liability is co-extensive with the principal debtor and continues notwithstanding involuntary discharge of the principal debtor by operation of law.
On this section: Provisions relating to insolvency resolution process for individuals, brought into force by impugned notification
-
Lalit Kumar Jain vs Union of India
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The Central Government, in exercise of powers conferred by Section 1(3) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, has authority to bring into force different provisions of the Code at different times for different categories of persons, including personal guarantors to corporate debtors. The 2018 Amendment Act, by creating distinct classification of personal guarantors under Section 2(e) and amending Section 60, provided sufficient parliamentary guidance for such selective application. The impugned notification, which brings into force provisions of Part III of the Code only in relation to personal guarantors to corporate debtors, is valid exercise of power conferred by Section 1(3) and does not amount to excessive delegation or modification of Code provisions. Furthermore, approval of a resolution plan for a corporate debtor does not discharge the personal guarantee liabilities of guarantors, as such liabilities arise from independent contracts of guarantee and are not discharged by involuntary discharge of principal debtor by operation of law.
On this section: Provisions relating to insolvency resolution process for individuals; brought into force by impugned notification for personal guarantors
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973[1]( page-4-0) and thereby affirmed the orders passed by the trial Court rejecting the applications filed for staying the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881[2]( page-4-1) , sine die till the conclusion of the proceedings initiated under Section 94 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016[3]( page-4-2) , before the National Company Law Tribunal. A writ petition has also been filed for declaration and direction that section 138 proceedings shall be deemed to be stayed during the operation of the moratorium period under section 96 IBC. The details of the …
-
… 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973[1]( page-4-0) and thereby affirmed the orders passed by the trial Court rejecting the applications filed for staying the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881[2]( page-4-1) , sine die till the conclusion of the proceedings initiated under Section 94 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016[3]( page-4-2) , before the National Company Law Tribunal. A writ petition has also been filed for declaration and direction that section 138 proceedings shall be deemed to be stayed during the operation of the moratorium period under section 96 IBC. The details of the …
-
… 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973[1]( page-4-0) and thereby affirmed the orders passed by the trial Court rejecting the applications filed for staying the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881[2]( page-4-1) , sine die till the conclusion of the proceedings initiated under Section 94 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016[3]( page-4-2) , before the National Company Law Tribunal. A writ petition has also been filed for declaration and direction that section 138 proceedings shall be deemed to be stayed during the operation of the moratorium period under section 96 IBC. The details of the …
Made under this section, and citing it
1 instrument states that it was made under this provision — the power to make it comes from here, so a change to any of them changes what this section requires in practice. Newest first.
Another 2 instruments name this provision in its title or its text without being made under it.
- Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority for Insolvency Resolution Process for Personal Guarantors to Corporate Debtors) Rules, 2019 dated 15.11.2019Rule 2019
- Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Personal Guarantors to Corporate Debtors) Regulations, 2019Regulation 2019
Questions about Section 94
What have the courts held on Section 94 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code?
Sanjay Singal vs Union of India (21 May 2021) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Provisions relating to insolvency resolution process for individuals, brought into force by impugned notification. Another 1 judgment on this section is set out below, all of them from the Supreme Court.
How do I find court cases under Section 94 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 94, section 94 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, section 94 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 2 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Sanjay Singal vs Union of India (21 May 2021).
What should I read with Section 94 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, and has it changed?
6 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. The rules and notifications made under it are where it actually bites, and there is one: most recently Notification of provisions under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 relating to Personal Guarantors to Corporate Debtor (dated 15.11.2019) (2019).
When was Section 94 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code enacted?
Section 94 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, cited as Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 94, was enacted on 28 May 2016 as Act 31 of 2016. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 240. Power to make regulations2349 words
- 5. Definitions2326 words
- 3. Definitions1381 words
- 29A. Person not eligible to be resolution applicant1152 words
- 239. Power to make rules963 words
- 196. Powers and functions of Board942 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.