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...
This analysis examines how Structured Supply Chain Finance (SSCF) fits into the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). It explores the ambiguity of classifying SSCF as financial debt and the implications for creditors.
An IBBI First Appellate Authority has disposed of an RTI appeal, criticizing the CPIO for a one-day delay in providing information but noting the response was satisfactory.
The NCLAT ruled that provident fund dues are not corporate debtor assets and must be paid in full during CIRP, prioritizing them over all other debts.
The above statutory provision makes it clear that in event the Applicant, fails to comply with the second Proviso to modify the application within thirty days from the date of amendment, deeming provision of law shall come into play and the application shall be deemed to have been withdrawn.
Madras High Court held that no interpretation contrary to Section 53 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 [IBC] can be attributed to the expression ‘going concern sale’ as contemplated under Regulation 32 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016.
The NCLAT Delhi rules on the Puneet Resutra vs. J&K Bank case, clarifying that a one-time settlement with a guarantor does not extinguish the principal borrowers debt. The court upheld the initiation of insolvency proceedings.
NCLAT dismissed Liquidator’s appeal as premature, urging NCLT Ahmedabad to decide pending IAs by the successful auction purchaser without delay.
Analysing how moratorium under IBC affects arbitration proceedings and the legal ambiguity around continuation or initiation during insolvency resolution.
NCLAT Delhi held that possession of unit by virtue of section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act is not admissible in case the agreement to sell is unregistered. Accordingly, sale consideration paid is directed to be refunded.
NCLAT Delhi held that application for intervention filed under section 59(7) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 [IBC] beyond the period of limitation of three years is time barred.
