NCLT Mumbai held that resolution plan of Corporate Debtor [Shivom Investment and Consultancy Limited] as submitted by Successful Resolution Applicant [Prashantbhai Ghanshyambhai Ukani] stands approved as meets the requirement of section 30(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
NCLT Delhi held that CIRP application under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code dismissed as the applicant is primarily seeking to recover its dues, rather than facilitating the resolution of the Corporate Debtor, who is solvent and operational.
NCLT Mumbai held that the claims of electricity department stand settled on distribution of liquidation estate by the liquidator. Hence, withholding of electricity connection due to payment of dues prior to issuance of sale certificate not justified.
Resolution plan for Steadfast Shipping Private Limited was approved under Section 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, after finding that the plan met all requirements under Section 30(2) of the Code and was approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) with 100% voting share.
NCLT Mumbai held that application for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process [CIRP] admissible since default of debt due and payable is established and default is in excess of minimum amount stipulated under IBC.
NCLT Delhi held that Fixed Deposit Receipts FDRs standing in the name of the Corporate Debtor constitute financial assets and form an integral part of the Corporate Debtors estate. Thus, resolution professional is directed to approach concerned bank and request defreezing of FDRs to ensure control over the same.
NCLT Ahmedabad held that application for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process [CIRP] filed by Financial Creditor [SBI] u/s. 7 of IBC against Corporate Debtor [Raninga Paper Mills Private Limited] is admitted as existence of financial debt and default demonstrated.
NCLT Mumbai held that resolution plan of Lokshakti Sugar & Allied Industries Ltd. [Corporate Debtor] as submitted by Geetanjali Sugar Private Limited meeting requirements of section 30(2) of the IBC stands approved.
NCLT Delhi held that the power of the Tribunal to restore the name of a struck off company under Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 is not a suo motu power. The restoration application is dismissed due to lack of diligence.
The NCLT Kolkata ruled that a bank guarantee can be invoked during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) moratorium, citing the IBC’s Section 14(3)(b) and key precedents.
