The NCLAT held that unregistered profit-sharing agreements do not create leasehold or occupancy rights in immovable property. The tribunal upheld eviction of the occupant from the corporate debtor’s hotel premises during CIRP.
NCLAT held that the order appointing the Resolution Professional under Section 97 was obtained on the basis of misrepresented and non-existent jurisdictional facts relating to the alleged personal guarantee. Accordingly, the impugned order was set aside as void ab initio.
NCLAT held that challenges to the approved resolution plan could not be reopened after earlier proceedings had attained finality. The appeal was dismissed as an attempt to re-agitate settled issues.
NCLAT held that dismissal for want of prosecution was unjustified where multiple adjournments were caused by the Tribunal due to paucity of time and technical issues. The ruling emphasizes that litigants should not be penalized when delays are not entirely attributable to them.
Fee reduction of ₹50,000 for the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) ordered by NCLT was reasonable, given that the IRP’s role was restricted by an interim stay on the constitution of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) between February 28 and September 1, 2023.
NCLAT observed that royalty payment obligation flowed directly from Technical Guidance Agreement and did not depend on issuance of invoices. Debt and default were therefore held established.
The Tribunal reiterated that disbursement of funds to the debtor is an essential condition for financial debt. Since no money was advanced to the corporate debtor, the claimant was not a financial creditor.
The NCLAT ruled that withdrawal under Section 12A of the IBC cannot be invoked once liquidation proceedings have commenced. The Tribunal held that post-liquidation settlement can only proceed through the Section 230 route under the Companies Act.
NCLAT held that foreign oil and gas assets owned through Videocon subsidiaries could not be included in the CIRP of Videocon Industries Ltd. The Tribunal ruled that subsidiaries and parent companies are distinct legal entities under insolvency law.
NCLAT held that a joint venture arrangement did not prevent insolvency proceedings where separate agreements clearly imposed supply obligations and payment responsibilities between parties. Tribunal ruled that unpaid supply dues constituted operational debt under IBC.
