INTRODUCTION
The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under India’s Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) serves as a cornerstone of the nation’s insolvency framework. Designed to provide a structured, transparent, and equitable mechanism for resolving corporate debt, CIRP addresses situations where corporate debtors fail to meet their financial obligations. With its dual focus on restructuring distressed businesses and facilitating orderly liquidation when recovery is not viable, CIRP plays an important role in maintaining financial stability within the economy. Balancing the interests of creditors and debtors aims to maximize asset value while fostering economic growth and preserving employment.
Financial creditors, operational creditors, or the debtor themselves can start the process, which is started when a debt default surpasses a predetermined threshold. After the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) admits an application, an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) is designated to supervise the assets and management of the debtor. A moratorium period, the filing of creditor claims, and the establishment of a Committee of Creditors (CoC) to authorize a workable resolution plan are all steps in the process.
Recent amendments in CIRP regulations have introduced extended timelines for claim submissions, strengthened creditor disclosures, and emphasized transparency through improved procedural mechanisms. These developments reflect India’s commitment to enhancing its insolvency framework to ensure efficiency and fairness. With clearly defined timelines and roles for stakeholders, CIRP continues to be instrumental in stabilizing distressed companies, protecting creditors’ interests, and contributing to the robust functioning of the corporate sector.
CIRP
Under India’s IBC, the CIRP is a legal process intended to handle corporate insolvency and bankruptcy. It offers a methodical approach to handling corporate debtors who fall behind on payments, especially when the total amount outstanding is beyond the legal threshold. In order to maximize the debtor’s assets for the benefit of creditors, CIRP’s main goal is to alleviate a corporate debtor’s financial hardship by either company restructuring or an orderly asset liquidation. This procedure is essential to preserving the economy’s financial stability since it guarantees that struggling companies get the chance to wind down or restructure fairly.
When there is a debt repayment default and the default amount reaches the minimum level set by the IBC, CIRP is started. The corporate debtor, operational and financial creditors (FCs and OCs), may submit a CIRP application. The procedure starts when an application is submitted to the Adjudicating Authority, usually the NCLT. After the admission of the application, an IRP is appointed to assume management and control over the corporate debtor’s assets.
The purpose of the CIRP framework is to guarantee openness, equity, and a systematic approach to insolvency resolution. It gives all parties involved—creditors and the resolution specialists—clear deadlines, decision-making procedures, and duties. CIRP seeks to stabilize troubled companies, preserve jobs, and guarantee the efficient operation of markets by weighing the interests of creditors and providing a chance for the debtor to recover.
INITIATION OF CIRP:
The official start of the CIRP occurs when an application is filed with the AA, which is often the NCLT. Among the eligible parties who may file such applications are FCs, OCs, or the corporate debtor itself (corporate applicant). To start the CIRP, the application must meet the standards outlined in the IBC, such as not making debt payments that are greater than the minimum amount needed.
After the application is submitted, the AA reviews the supporting documentation and, if all requirements are satisfied, admits the application. The AA issues an order upon admission, known as the Insolvency Commencement Date (ICD), which signifies the start of the insolvency process. This date is crucial because it starts the clock for a number of deadlines under the IBC, such as the 180-day window for insolvency resolution and the optional 90-day extension.
The corporate debtor is immediately subject to a moratorium upon the order’s issuing. This moratorium allows for a new beginning in the resolution process by stopping any legal actions or processes against the debtor, including asset seizures and the continuation of enforcement tools. Furthermore, an IRP is designated to take charge of the debtor’s assets and management. The IRP is essential to managing the procedure, protecting the debtor’s assets, and starting the process of resolving the financial difficulties through liquidation or restructuring. The CIRP officially starts at this point.
ELIGIBILITY TO INITIATE CIRP:
The nature of the creditor’s relationship with the corporate debtor determines eligibility for starting the CIRP under the IBC. FCs, OCs, and the corporate debtor itself are the three types of entities that can initiate CIRP. According to Section 7 of the IBC, an FC is any individual or organization that has a financial debt owed to them. Financial debts include bonds, loans, and any other obligations resulting from banks, financial institutions, and other lenders taking into account. In the event of a financial debt default, FCs have the power to start CIRP and typically have a sizable stake in the corporate debtor’s financial stability. An OC refers to people or organizations with operational debts, as defined by Section 8. The sources of these debts include contractors, vendors, and even unpaid employees who provide goods or services. Taxes and other government obligations are also included. Although they play a relatively little role in the resolution process compared to financial creditors, operational creditors have the authority to start CIRP if the corporate debtor fails to pay operational debts.
A corporate applicant may initiate CIRP in compliance with Section 10 of the IBC by submitting an application on behalf of the corporate debtor. This can be done by the debtor itself, its partners, members, or anybody who has the power to act on its behalf, including those who are responsible for managing the debtor’s assets.
By ensuring that only parties with a valid financial interest can start the process, these eligibility requirements uphold the CIRP’s fairness and transparency.
FINANCIAL DEBT AND OPERATIONAL DEBT AND MINIMUM DEFAULT AMOUNT
A key component of the IBC’s CIRP is the differentiation between FC and OC. Both forms of debt have unique traits and contribute differently to the process.
Any debt resulting from a financial transaction in which the consideration is determined by the time value of money is referred to as financial debt. This covers debts like loans, bonds, or advances from financial institutions that need interest payments. Financial commitments pertaining to lease or hire-purchase agreements, where payments are spread out over time, are also covered. According to Section 5(8)(a) to (i) of the IBC, financial debt includes a range of liabilities, including bonds, borrowed sums, and even lease-related financial obligations.
Due to the nature and magnitude of the claims, FCs, who are owed this kind of debt, typically have a greater say in the insolvency process.
Conversely, the provision of goods and services to the corporate debtor results in operational debt. This can include outstanding invoices from contractors, suppliers, or workers, as well as responsibilities to the government, like as taxes and regulatory duties. Unlike financial debts, which are linked to the time value of money, OCs usually have claims based on the failure to pay for products or services rendered.
The threshold amount needed to initiate the CIRP is known as the Minimum Default Amount. Through a notification dated March 24, 2020, the government raised the initial value of INR 1 lakh to INR 1 crore. This increase was intended to ensure that only serious defaults are taken into account under CIRP, decrease the number of lesser insolvency cases, and free up the process to concentrate on larger, more complicated cases.
STAGES OF CIRP
Under the IBC, the CIRP is a comprehensive procedure intended to alleviate corporate debtors’ financial difficulties. There are multiple steps involved, all of which are essential to guaranteeing a systematic and open insolvency resolution. Initiation of CIRP, Public Announcement and Moratorium, CoC Constitution, RP Appointment, Expression of Interest Process Initiation, and Resolution Plan Approval are the primary phases of CIRP.
Initiation of CIRP
The CIRP Admissions Procedure when an application is submitted to the NCLT, which is typically the Adjudicating Authority (AA). The corporate debtor itself, FC, or OC may submit the application. As soon as the application is approved, the AA issues an order admitting it, and the CIRP is started. The date the insolvency procedure starts, known as the ICD or Insolvency Commencement Date, is this AA order. This date is important since it establishes the deadlines for various CIRP process processes.
Moratorium and Public Announcement
Under Section 14 of the IBC, a moratorium is imposed once the ICD is declared. This moratorium refers to a standstill of all pending litigation against the corporate debtor including freezing of bank accounts and also restrictions on creditors from taking enforcement actions such as asset seizures. The moratorium acts as a protective barrier for the corporate debtor, cooling the frenzy of crisis management and precluding intervention by the external enforcers.
At the same time, the AA designates an IRP to oversee the corporate debtor’s assets and operations. Enforcing the moratorium and overseeing the debtors’ affairs throughout the settlement process are the responsibilities of the IRP. These powers are essentially given to the IRP, and the board of directors or partners of the corporate debtor loses its authority.
Additionally, a public announcement is made inviting creditors to submit their claims. This public notice allows all creditors—both financial and operational—to come forward with their dues, which will then be verified and processed as part of the insolvency proceedings.
Constitution of CoC
Once the claims are collated, a CoC is formed. The CoC consists of the financial creditors who have submitted valid claims and whose debts are recognized. These creditors are grouped according to their claims, and a list of creditors is prepared. The IRP is required to file a report with the AA certifying the constitution of the CoC.
The first meeting of the CoC must take place within 7 days of filing the report. During this meeting, the CoC assesses the claims, discusses the progress of the insolvency process, and begins planning the next steps. They also decide on the insolvency resolution process costs, which include expenses for managing the corporate debtor and conducting the CIRP.
Appointment of RP
A crucial next step after the formation of the CoC is the nomination of an RP. When it comes to overseeing the corporate debtor’s insolvency resolution procedure, the RP is essential. The nomination of the RP is the responsibility of the CoC, and it is usually determined by the RP’s background and proficiency in managing insolvency cases.
The CoC selects two registered valuers to evaluate the corporate debtor’s financial status in addition to the RP. These appraisers assess the debtor’s assets’ honorable value and liquidation value. Liquidation value is the projected value of assets if the firm were to be liquidated immediately, whereas fair value is what the company’s assets would get in a continuing concern scenario.
Powers and Duties of IRP/RP
The IRP and the Resolution Professional (RP) hold significant powers during the CIRP. They have the authority to appoint professionals and experts to assist in the resolution process. If necessary, the IRP or RP may also sell the corporate debtor’s unencumbered assets to maximize value for creditors. The IRP/RP is also tasked with examining transactions that may be deemed fraudulent or preferential, as per relevant sections of the Code. This ensures that the resolution process is fair, and that assets are not wrongfully diverted or undervalued before the resolution process begins.
Initiation of Expression of Interest Process
One of the most important stages in the CIRP is the Expression of Interest (EOI) process. The RP invites interested parties to submit an expression of interest to take over the management or assets of the corporate debtor. These interested parties are then scrutinized for eligibility and undergo due diligence to ensure they meet the necessary criteria for resolution applicants.
Once the interested parties are identified, they are invited to submit their resolution plans within a prescribed timeline. These plans outline the proposed course of action for reviving the corporate debtor, which may include financial restructuring, changes in management, or asset sales. The RP evaluates these plans based on their feasibility and alignment with the interests of creditors.
Approval of Resolution Plan
The resolution plans are sent to the CoC, which considers them and votes to approve the best one. According to the worth of their claims, a resolution plan needs to be accepted by at least 66% of the CoC members. After the plan has been accepted, it is sent to the AA for signature. The AA approves the proposal if it is satisfied that it complies with all legal requirements and offers a just settlement.
If a resolution plan is not approved in the allotted time or if no plan is filed, the corporate debtor may be liquidated, meaning that its assets would be sold to compensate creditors. Liquidation is the last resort when resolution attempts are unsuccessful, and the process starts when the AA orders it.
TIMELINES AND DEVELOPMENTS
The IBC’s CIRP adheres to a set schedule to guarantee that the resolution procedure is finished in a fair amount of time. The CIRP must be finished within 180 days of the application being admitted by the AA, usually the NCLT, in accordance with Section 12(1) of the IBC. This schedule is intended to guarantee a prompt and effective settlement procedure, avoiding protracted uncertainty for creditors and other parties involved.
However, if additional time is required to conclude the process, a one-time extension of 90 days may be granted by the AA, allowing the CIRP to extend up to a maximum of 330 days. This extension is typically granted when the resolution process is making significant progress, but more time is needed for completing the resolution or liquidation plans.
The AA may, in extraordinary circumstances, decide to extend the deadline past 330 days; however, these extensions are only given in certain situations where the parties involved are unable to control delays. According to the Supreme Court’s decision in the Essar Steel case, such extensions might be taken into consideration in situations when the plaintiffs are unable to control the delays, such as complicated legal battles, awaiting permissions, or other difficulties that could impact the resolution process. This guarantees the preservation of the CIRP framework’s efficacy while safeguarding the interests of the stakeholders.
CONCLUSION
The CIRP stands as a critical mechanism within India’s IBC, providing a balanced and structured approach to addressing corporate financial distress. By establishing clear guidelines for debt resolution or liquidation, CIRP protects the interests of both creditors and debtors while fostering a transparent and accountable insolvency process. The inclusion of key stakeholders, such as financial and operational creditors, through mechanisms like the CoC, ensures that decisions are made collectively and in alignment with economic and legal priorities. Timely resolution is central to CIRP, as evidenced by the stipulated 180-day timeline and the optional extension to 330 days. This ensures that insolvency cases do not remain unresolved indefinitely, safeguarding market efficiency and reducing systemic risks. Recent amendments to CIRP regulations further strengthen this framework, offering creditors greater flexibility in claim submissions, introducing measures for enhanced transparency, and empowering RP to provide expert insights. The process also reflects the dynamic evolution of India’s insolvency framework. Legislative updates, alongside landmark judicial rulings such as in the Essar Steel case, demonstrate the system’s adaptability to emerging challenges and complexities. Together, these enhancements ensure that CIRP remains a robust, fair, and efficient tool for addressing insolvency.
Author Bio
