Corporate Law : NCLAT held that the CoC may decide to liquidate a corporate debtor under Section 33(2) before inviting resolution plans, with limi...
Corporate Law : This article explains why the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code places commercial decision-making in the hands of the Committee of Cr...
Corporate Law : The article explains how the NCLAT interpreted Section 66(1) to extend liability beyond company insiders to third parties who know...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court held that individuals investing for financial returns rather than home ownership cannot invoke Section 7 of the ...
Corporate Law : The High Court held that a company cannot shift its registered office after approval of a resolution plan when appeals against the...
Corporate Law : IBBI has proposed amendments to CIRP, Liquidation, and Personal Guarantor Regulations to improve valuation, clarify RP duties, sim...
Corporate Law : The proposed amendments require comprehensive project-wise disclosures, technical assessments, and mandatory information in resolu...
Corporate Law : The IBBI has announced contractual vacancies for Research Associates and Consultants in law and business management disciplines. T...
Corporate Law : 2026 Guidelines streamline selection of Insolvency Professionals for IRP, RP, Liquidator, and Bankruptcy Trustee roles, ensuring t...
Corporate Law : The amendments replace the consultation committee with CoC oversight, giving creditors greater control over liquidation decisions....
Corporate Law : Bombay HC held that Section 14 IBC moratorium does not prevent deemed conveyance under Section 11 MOFA and restored the society's ...
Company Law : Kerala HC held Rule 55 empowers NCLT to accept additional pleadings, setting aside refusal to entertain further objections in a Se...
Corporate Law : NCLAT held that invoice discounting through the TReDS platform does not convert operational debt into financial debt. The appeal w...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court held that a Section 7 IBC application can proceed despite pending winding-up proceedings where no irreversible stage...
Corporate Law : NCLT admitted the Section 9 petition after holding that campaign-related emails did not constitute a genuine pre-existing dispute....
Corporate Law : The IBBI First Appellate Authority held that although the CPIO failed to respond within the statutory 30-day period under the RTI ...
Corporate Law : IBBI cancelled an IP’s registration over systemic CIRP misuse, flawed valuations, non-disclosures, compliance failures and lack ...
Corporate Law : IBBI has released the Phase 10 syllabus for the Limited Insolvency Examination, effective from October 1, 2026, to reflect evolvin...
Corporate Law : The First Appellate Authority directed the CPIO to dispose of the RTI application after finding it was not decided within the 30-d...
Corporate Law : The Disciplinary Committee found that the Resolution Professional delayed admission of a financial creditor's claim and failed to ...
Explore the case of Motel Rahans Pvt. Ltd. Vs JSM Devcons Pvt Ltd., where a secured financial creditor approached NCLT Indore Bench seeking a forensic audit of the Corporate Debtor. Learn about the scope of consideration by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) in appointing professionals, the role of the Resolution Professional, and the direction given by the court for a forensic audit. Understand the implications of the court’s decision and the limited role of CoC in approving fees for auditors.
NCLT Indore directed appointment of a forensic auditor to conduct audit on irregularities related to assets of corporate debtor in case of Motel Rahans Pvt Ltd Vs JSM Devcons Pvt Ltd.
IBBI disposed the appeal filed by Yardi Prabhu Consultants & Valuers Pvt. Ltd. against suspension order issued on April 6, 2022. The appeal was made in response to a show cause notice regarding alleged contraventions of the Valuation Rules. The suspension was based on the alleged lack of eligibility of a director, as he faced […]
NCLAT Delhi held that as there exists financial debt and default, application u/s 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) is duly admissible.
NCLAT Delhi held that liquidator is obliged to consider the average of the value arrived as per Regulation 35 of the CIRP Regulation, 2016.
Supreme Court reaffirmed that Section 66 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code cannot be invoked against third parties and that civil remedies available under the law must be pursued for recovery of dues from such parties.
Recently, the Delhi High Court in the case of Rajiv Chakraborty vs Enforcement Directorate revisited the issue pertaining to the tussle between the Prevention on Money Laundering Act 2002, Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002, and Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 and emphasized on the need of a coherent and balanced approach while interpreting these statutes.
The DC notes that it is recorded in the minutes of 15th CoC meeting held on 22.04.2022 that “RP further informed that complete records of Corporate Debtor is not available prior to year 2015 as EOW has seized some records vide Memo dated 10.12.2015. RP approached to the EOW office New Delhi for releasing the records […]
Explore the position of a Recovery Certificate Holder under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Learn about the Supreme Courts interpretation in the Kotak Mahindra Bank vs. A. Balakrishnan case, addressing issues of maintainability, applicability of limitation, and the widened scope of financial debts and creditors.
In Associate Décor Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner case, Karnataka HC weighs moratorium’s effect on tax proceedings under IBC, halting them pending resolution.
