NCLAT Chennai held that CIRP plan not approved by minimum 66% of the Committee of Creditors is considered to be failed Resolution Plan and on submission of such failed Resolution Plan the Adjudicating Authority will initiate Liquidation Process.
NCLAT Delhi held that Financial Creditors can invoke the proceedings under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against the Guarantor, who on default of Principal Borrower transforms into Corporate Debtor
Subrata Maity Vs Amit C. Poddar (NCLAT Delhi) The Adjudicating Authority has noted in the order that the Appellant was arrested by the CBI and due to which 116 days was lost due to incapability of the Appellant to act as a Liquidator. Learned Counsel for the Appellant contends that the Appellant was granted bail […]
Sreedhar Tripathy Vs Gujarat State Financial Corporation & Ors. (NCLAT Delhi) The grievance of the Appellant is that CoC’s decision is arbitrary decision, it cannot be said to be decision taken in commercial wisdom of the CoC. Section 33 Sub-section (2) of the I&B Code which deals with initiation of liquidation. The Explanation under Section […]
Adjudicating Authority is empowered to consider any application filed by the Liquidator or Successful Auction Purchaser, which may arise with regard to terms and conditions of auction sale or sale as going concern as per the Liquidation Regulation
NCLAT Delhi held that once One Time Settlement is failed and CIRP is initiated, the amount lying in the no lien account belongs to the Corporate Debtor.
NCLAT held that in event the submission of Appellant is accepted that due to financial difficulty he is unable to implement Resolution plan and he be permitting to go back from the commitments made in the Resolution Plan, it shall have disastrous effect on the entire process undertaken.
NCLAT held that when judgment is pronounced without reasoning, it is not a judgment in the eye of law for the reason that the requirement of reasoning either by Original Court or Appellate Authority is to convey the mind of the judge while deciding such an issue before the Tribunal.
NCLAT Delhi held that default of instalment of Settlement Agreement does not come within the definition of operational debt as it does not fall within the definition of additional debt as per Section 5(21) of the IBC.
SGA Fashion Pvt. Ltd. Vs CMA Sandeep Kumar Bhatt (NCLAT Delhi) The documentary evidence on record establishes that the Appellant herein contended before the Learned Adjudicating Authority that pre-bidding qualification will not bind the bidders and sought for relief to be granted under the eligibility criteria at Clause 1.15 of the tender document. Having sought […]
