NCLAT Delhi held that application under section 9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 (IBC) of operational creditor not maintainable due to pre-existing dispute. Further, there was no requirement for the Adjudicating Authority to go under the skin of dispute
NCLAT Delhi held that held that considering the text of Section 60(5)(c) of IBC liquidators can ask for the refund of the Performance Bank Guarantee (PBG) amount, which was given by the Corporate Debtor towards margin money for securing a PBG.
As per the agreements, assessee had paid their respective consideration amount. As per the aforesaid flat buyer Agreement, the Corporate Debtor had promised to deliver the possession of the flats within a prescribed timeline.
NCLAT Chennai held that application for staying auction process of Corporate Debtor not tenable since order rejecting resolution plan submitted by the appellant not objected. Accordingly, appeal dismissed.
NCLAT Delhi held that the cause of action for filing the under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code arose on 16.12.2010, whereas, filing of an application in the year 2019 is hopelessly barred by time.
KSK Mahanadi Power Company Limited (Corporate Debtor) is a company engaged in business of power generation. The Corporate Debtor was admitted into Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process on 03.10.2019.
NCLAT Delhi held that admission of application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) for initiation of CIRP of Corporate Debtor untenable due to pre-existing dispute surrounding operational debt.
After the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court I.A. 961/2024 was filed by the RP before the Adjudicating Adjudicating Authority who has reserved the Judgment in I.A. 5283/2022, i.e. Plan approval Application de-reserved the same.
NCLAT Delhi held that initiation of proceedings u/s. 13 sub-section (2) and (4) of SARFAESI Act by the creditor prior to filing of Section 10 application, cannot be a ground to hold that Section 10 application is filed with malicious and fraudulent intent.
NCLAT Chennai held that claim raised by operational creditor towards performance pay cannot be taken as operational debt hence application proceedings under section 9 of the Insolvency Bankruptcy Code (IBC) for drawing CIRP proceedings not tenable.