Corporate Law : The Supreme Court held that liabilities arising from corporate guarantees qualify as financial debt under Section 5(8) of the Inso...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court ruled that a shortfall payment clause in a Deed of Hypothecation can qualify as a contract of guarantee under th...
Corporate Law : The article examines how conflicting Supreme Court judgments in Rainbow Papers and Raman Ispat created uncertainty regarding the s...
Corporate Law : The IBC (Amendment) Act, 2026 introduces CIIRP as a faster and proactive insolvency mechanism for early-stage financial stress. Th...
Corporate Law : Explains how the Court held that insolvency proceedings cannot be used as a pressure tactic for debt recovery. Even if default is ...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court upheld joint insolvency proceedings against two interconnected real estate companies due to common management an...
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 : The proposal focuses on enabling creditors to initiate resolution while retaining debtor management under supervision. It sets out...
Corporate Law : The amendments arise from the inclusion of a unified “service provider” definition under the Code. The move expands regulatory...
Corporate Law : NCLT Indore held that dissolution under Section 54 of the IBC was justified after all assets of the corporate debtor were liquidat...
Corporate Law : NCLT Mumbai held that ongoing One-Time Settlement discussions cannot defeat insolvency proceedings when debt and default are admit...
Corporate Law : NCLAT held that foreign oil and gas assets owned through Videocon subsidiaries could not be included in the CIRP of Videocon Indus...
Corporate Law : Tribunal noted that the CIRP period, including all extensions, had reached 741 days and expired on 20 November 2025. Since no plan...
Corporate Law : The NCLT Mumbai held that liquidation became mandatory under Section 33(2) of the IBC after the Committee of Creditors rejected al...
Corporate Law : The amendment bars related parties, recent auditors, and connected persons from acting as registered valuers in pre-pack insolvenc...
Corporate Law : The IBBI amended the Liquidation Process Regulations, 2016 to allow appointment of one registered valuer for each asset class in M...
Corporate Law : The IBBI amended the CIRP Regulations, 2016 to permit appointment of one set of registered valuers for MSME corporate debtors. The...
Corporate Law : The IBBI Amendment Regulations, 2026 introduce nominee directors on IPA governing boards and strengthen oversight mechanisms. The ...
Corporate Law : The order highlights that delayed applications, late progress reports, and non-compliance with filing requirements amounted to ser...
NCLAT Delhi held that post approval of resolution plan Non-Fund Based [NFB] agreement has to be read in a manner to give effect to the resolution plan and not to make any clause of resolution plan otiose and unworkable.
Where secured creditor failed to pay the liquidation costs within 90 days after its intention to realize the security interest, the security interest should stand relinquished under Regulation 21A(3) of the Liquidation Regulations, 2016.
NCLT Mumbai held that sale of property of personal guarantors by financial creditor under SARFAESI Act during protection of moratorium under section 96 of the IBC is invalid sale as protection of moratorium under section 96 is far greater than of section 14.
This appeal arises from an order dated 09.01.2024 by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai Bench-I. The Appellant, Mr. Puneet P. Bhatia, a suspended director of Barracks Retail India Pvt. Ltd.
In a recent ruling, the Delhi bench (NCLAT) while dismissing the appeal of the bank have held that Once the CIRP was initiated, the amount lying in the “No Lien Account”, is an asset of the Corporate Debtor if OTS did not materialize.
RP could not be blamed for having breached the IBC for the CoC to have approved the resolution plan of Parth with requisite majority share which action was taken by the CoC in the exercise of its commercial wisdom.
This is an Appeal under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against the dismissal of the Company Petition by which the Adjudicating Authority has dismissed the Section 7 Petition.
NCLT Delhi held that admissible of application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) not justified since invoices covered under section 10A has to be excluded and accordingly amount claimed will be less than threshold limit of Rs. 1 Crore.
IBBI disposes of RTI appeal seeking details on the appointment of a Resolution Professional. Information exempted under fiduciary and commercial confidentiality clauses.
Since the Resolution Plan was duly approved by the NCLAT and there being no progress worth the name, there was no other option but to invoke our jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution and direct that the Corporate Debtor be taken in Liquidation.