NCLAT Chennai held that resolution professional is permitted to issue fresh Form G and to invite Expression of Interest (EoI) from new and interested eligible Prospective Resolution Applicants subject to the stipulations that the CIRP process has to be completed in a time bound manner.
NCLAT Delhi held that it is well settled proposition of law that for a pre-existing dispute to be a ground to nullify an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Accordingly, adjudicating authority rightly rejected application u/s. 9.
NCLAT upheld the dismissal of IBC proceedings against Kerala Medical Services Corporation, citing D.J. Laboratories’ material concealment of facts regarding pending disputes and a demand notice reply.
Delhi NCLAT dismisses appeal challenging court records without correction application, reiterating late replies hinder case conclusion. Cites Supreme Court precedent.
NCLAT Delhi held that application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code for initiation of CIRP duly admissible since One-Time Settlement with guarantors didn’t amount to full and final satisfaction of loan vis-à-vis the Corporate Debtor.
NCLAT Delhi held that the capital investment under the reseller agreement lacks the essential ingredients of financial debt under Section 5(8) (f) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Accordingly, dismissal of petition u/s. 7 for CIRP justified.
NCLAT Delhi held that direction of making contribution to the assets of Corporate Debtor upheld as person knowingly carried on the business of Corporate Debtor with intent to defraud creditors or for fraudulent purpose.
NCLAT Delhi held that section 238 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 [IBC] cannot override the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 [PMLA]. Thus, attachment under PMLA cannot be undone merely because CIRP is ongoing.
NCLAT Chennai dismissed an appeal challenging a 2024 order, citing appellant’s lack of diligence in rectifying defects despite multiple opportunities and a year-long delay.
NCLAT remands insolvency case to NCLT, stressing individual merit assessment over past unrelated dismissals. Tribunal must pass speaking order after fresh hearing.
