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 Ministry of Corporate Affairs highlighted that the IBC resolution process facilitated creditor recoveries exceeding ₹4 lakh ...
Corporate Law : The IBBI has announced contractual vacancies for Research Associates and Consultants in law and business management disciplines. T...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court upheld joint insolvency proceedings against two interconnected real estate companies due to common management an...
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 : 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 ...
Corporate Law : The Disciplinary Committee imposed a two-year suspension after finding failures in claim verification, unauthorized financial deci...
The IBBI held that forming a Committee of Creditors without verifying claims violates core insolvency principles. The ruling emphasizes that claim verification is mandatory before granting voting rights or conducting CoC meetings.
The Disciplinary Committee held that reconstituting the CoC without prior approval of the Adjudicating Authority violates established legal principles. Subsequent approval does not cure the initial procedural breach. The decision underscores limits on the powers of resolution professionals.
A key land asset was excluded from the CIRP, leading to rejection of the resolution plan. The regulator held that failure to include and regularize ownership violated duties and warranted suspension.
The case highlights failure to provide complete and verifiable information in the Information Memorandum. It also underscores that reliance on external systems like VDR does not replace statutory disclosure obligations.
A claim submitted without documents was later verified after the deadline but not processed as per law. The authority held that failure to place it before CoC and seek condonation violated CIRP regulations.
The IBBI flagged improper admission of a joint developer as a financial creditor without adequate verification. The ruling highlights the need to correctly classify claims under insolvency law.
The court examined whether delay in filing returns during insolvency proceedings constituted genuine hardship. It held that delay caused due to CIRP and management transition must be condoned to avoid unjust denial of tax benefits.
The Tribunal held that appeals against liquidator decisions must be filed within 14 days. It ruled that delays beyond this period cannot be condoned.
The Tribunal held that all resolution plans were rightly rejected as they offered values below liquidation value. It emphasized that the CoC’s commercial judgment, based on financial viability, cannot be interfered with unless statutory provisions are violated. The ruling reinforces that business decisions of the CoC are paramount in insolvency proceedings.
The issue involved whether a guarantee cap covered both principal and interest. The Tribunal held that default interest is a separate liability. The takeaway is that interest obligations can extend beyond capped principal liability.
