NCLAT Delhi requested the Secretary, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Govt of India to get detailed enquiry/ investigation by an appropriate authority/agency as in number of court proceedings the parties are coming with fabricated document.
NCLAT Delhi held that the First Schedule of IBBI (Insolvency Professionals) Regulations, 2016 provides that the Resolution Professional is expected to charge his fees in a transparent manner which should be a reasonable reflection of the works undertaken rather than maximizing their own personal benefits.
NCLAT held that the Adjudicating Authority rightly granted an extension of 90 days period after expiry of 300 days for fresh issuance of Form-G and completion of CIRP process.
NCLAT Delhi held that there is NCLT (National Company Law Tribunal) has jurisdiction to remit the plan for reconsidering the amendment which the Successful Resolution Applicant himself was requesting to be carried out.
NCLAT Delhi held that adjudicating authority rightly reduced fees payable to Resolution Professional on failure in complying with his responsibilities of completing CIRP in a time bound manner.
NCLAT Delhi held that operational creditor can initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against a Corporate Debtor only in clear cases where no real dispute exists between the two parties.
NCLAT Chennai held that suspension of initiation of CIRP (Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process) as per provisions of section 10A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 applies to date of default i.e. 31.03.2020.
NCLAT rules in favor of Tata Power, stating no arrears payment needed before the date of Resolution Plan approval against Jagannath Sponge Pvt Ltd.
NCLAT Chennai dismisses Kotak Mahindra Bank’s appeal in the Orchid Pharma case, affirming limited authority post approval of resolution plan. Analysis and conclusion provided.
A deep dive into NCLAT Chennai judgment on minority shareholder rights & Board Meetings in case of Radhakrishnan Babu Nirmala Vs Precise Limbus Eye Care.
