The tribunal held that insufficient stamping of a loan agreement does not invalidate insolvency proceedings. Default was established through other documentary evidence. The ruling emphasizes substance over technical defects.
The tribunal upheld rejection of a resolution applicant’s EOI for not meeting the minimum net worth requirement set by the CoC. It ruled that MSME status does not exempt compliance with eligibility criteria fixed under IBC.
The case examined whether Tribunal approval was required for extending preference share redemption. It was held that such extension within 20 years does not require NCLT intervention and can be done with shareholder consent.
The issue was whether the insolvency application was time-barred. The Tribunal held that balance sheet entries and revival letters extend limitation under law. The key takeaway is that acknowledgment of debt can revive limitation periods.
NCLT Ahmedabad held that composition scheme of arrangement aimed at consolidating Adani Group’s renewable energy and green hydrogen with Adani New Industries Ltd. and Adani Enterprises Ltd. is sanctioned.
NCLT Indore held that pendency of proceedings before the Debt Recovery Tribunal is not a bar to initiation of proceedings under the Code. Accordingly, application u/s. 7 of IBC admitted as existence of financial debt and occurrence of default thereon by corporate debtor duly established by financial creditor.
NCLT Mumbai held that application for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process [CIRP] under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against corporate debtor admitted as financial debt and default thereon duly established.
The Tribunal held that allegations of siphoning ₹30 lakh were not supported by any evidence tracing funds to the respondent. Mere non-reflection in books was found insufficient to establish fraud. The ruling clarifies that concrete proof of diversion and intent is required under Section 66(1).
The tribunal held that default arose after valid invocation of the corporate guarantee and non-payment within the notice period. It ruled that the Section 7 petition was within limitation and debt and default were established.
The tribunal held that alleged disputes on quality were raised only after the demand notice and lacked prior evidence. It admitted the petition after finding operational debt and default clearly established.
