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 ...
The Corporate Debtor used the services/ items extended and supplied by the Operational Creditor but failed to clear the dues. Accordingly, the Operational Creditor/Petitioner issued Demand Notice u/s 8 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 dated 24.05.2021 in Form 3 thereby demanding for repayment of outstanding amount to the tune of Rs.1,44,07,834/-. Despite receipt of said Demand Notice, the Corporate Debtor neither replied to the same nor repaid the outstanding dues.
NCLAT Delhi held that once One Time Settlement is failed and CIRP is initiated, the amount lying in the no lien account belongs to the Corporate Debtor.
NCLAT held that in event the submission of Appellant is accepted that due to financial difficulty he is unable to implement Resolution plan and he be permitting to go back from the commitments made in the Resolution Plan, it shall have disastrous effect on the entire process undertaken.
NCLT Hyderabad held that dismissed the application of corporate debtors as provisions of rule 43 of the NCLT Rules empowers the Adjudicating Authority, and not to the corporate debtors, to seek production of documents.
The DC notes that inspection notice was served on him on the 09.08.2021. However, Mr. Varun preferred not to respond to it despite more than one year has elapsed in-between. Furthermore, Mr. Varun has neither responded nor he preferred to be avail personal hearing to put his submissions in response to the SCN issued dated […]
DC observes that the CIRP Regulations covers the complete expenses and fees of the IRP/ RP, and this fee is payable after ratification by the CoC. The approval by the CoC of the expenses incurred in the CIRP is a mechanism for keeping a check on the expenditures made by the IRP/ RP. In the […]
NCLAT Delhi held that default of instalment of Settlement Agreement does not come within the definition of operational debt as it does not fall within the definition of additional debt as per Section 5(21) of the IBC.
it is found that Mr. Prakash had neither disclosed the appointment of his brother through M/s Ibay Capital before the CoC nor made relationship disclosure of engagement of M/s Ibay Capital on the website of the IPA. Further, the valuation report was submitted by M/s iVas Partners whose appointment or fee was not approved/ratified by […]
Appellants are the erstwhile Promoters and therefore they cannot be continued to be in the Company in any capacity may be as shareholders as if they continue Resolution Plan shall not be workable at all.
IBBI notifies Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Model Bye-Laws and Governing Board of Insolvency Professional Agencies) (Amendment) Regulations, 2022
