DECISION

ROBERT E. GRANT, Chief Bankruptcy Judge.

This case founders on the shoals of damages. The plaintiff/trustee contends the defendants failed to disclose material facts necessary to correct misleading information previously given to the debtors in connection with their purchase of the stock of Espresso Gallery, Inc. from the defendant, Steven E. Barcus, the defendant Kari Romey's father.1 This action seeks to recover for that claimed violation of Indiana securities laws.2 See, I.C. 23-19-5-1(2), 23-19-5-9. In the event of such a violation, "the purchaser may maintain an action to recover the consideration paid for the security, less the amount of any income received on the security, . . . upon tender of the security . . ." I.C. 23-19-5-9(a)(1). This remedy is essentially rescissionary. The buyer returns what it received from the seller and gets back what it gave. Here, the only consideration the debtors gave their seller was the promise to pay the agreed upon purchase price in installments, their guaranty and assumption of various corporate obligations, and the promise to hold the defendants harmless from them.3 The only payments actually made to anyone were made by the corporation to third parties — such as Bank of America, Instant Whip, Theta Ridge, and other corporate payables — on account of its own obligations; payments that would have had to be made regardless of who owned the company's stock. Yet, those payments are what the trustee seeks to recover from the defendants in this action "because of the [debtors'] own infusions of cash [into the business] and more than a year of unpaid labor." Plaintiff's Post-Trial Brief, pg. 18. But, the corporation's obligation to make those payments did not depend upon the sale agreement and would not be eliminated if that agreement is rescinded. They are not recoverable under I.C. 23-19-5-9(a)(1) and judgment will be entered for the defendants.