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...
Mr. Maity is handling 13 assignments, which are ongoing. It has been mentioned in the press release, that the CBI has arrested Mr. Maity regarding demand for undue advantage of Rs.20,00,000/-.
Invent Asset Securitisation And Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. Vs Girnar Fibres Ltd (Supreme Court of India) Time and again, it has been expressed and explained by this Court that the provisions of the Code are essentially intended to bring the corporate debtor to its feet and are not of money recovery proceedings as such. The intent […]
It is for the Appellant to take remedies out of the Agreement and it is open for the parties to take legal proceedings as permitted in law. In view of the fact that the payment made was initially towards the advance license fee it was an operational debt, the Adjudicating Authority has rightly admitted the application under Section 9.
NCLAT Delhi dismisses appeal, upholding the jurisdiction of NCLT, Principal Bench at New Delhi, in admitting Section 7 Application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
Resolution Professional’s job is confined to making recommendations; there is no aspect of adjudication on the Resolution Professional’s behalf. The final decision on whether the application should be accepted or rejected is made by the Adjudicating Authority, which is not bound by the Resolution Professional’s advice.
IndusInd Bank Ltd. Vs Rajendra K. Bhuta (NCLAT Delhi) When the Hon’ble Supreme Court by Interim Order dated 26th November, 2018 has stayed the insolvency proceedings which proceedings ultimately were set aside by the final Judgment dated 2nd September, 2019, we are of the view that Resolution Professional is not entitled for any fee after […]
The present article attempts to find answer to the question whether NCLT or DRT is the appropriate adjudicating authority as far as application for insolvency resolution of the personal guarantors to the corporate debtors is concerned.
Ramesh Chander Agarwala Vs State Bank of India (NCLAT Delhi) It is true that in Ravi Ajit Kulkarni’s case this Tribunal has in paragraph 44 of the Judgment has laid down that limited notice by the Adjudicating Authority also be given to the Personal Guarantors. In the preset case, although no limited notice as contemplated […]
Narinder Garg Vs Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. (Supreme Court) In P. Mohanraj & Others v. Shah Brothers Ispat Private Limited, (2021) 6 SCC 258, a Bench of three-Judges of this Court considered the matter whether a corporate entity in respect of which moratorium had become effective could be proceeded against in terms of Sections 138 […]
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Board) notified the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Liquidation Process) (Amendment) Regulations, 2022 (Amendment Regulations 2022) on 28th April, 2022.
