Corporate Law : Explains how recent tribunal decisions shaped the rules for selling corporate debtors as going concerns, highlighting compliance...
Corporate Law : The Tripartite Agreement Trap: When Banks Lose Financial Creditor Status in Real Estate Insolvency This case memo discussed the ru...
Corporate Law : NCLAT holds that time spent in pending Debt Recovery Tribunal proceedings cannot be excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Ac...
Corporate Law : RTI inquiry into NCLT/NCLAT reveals member vacancies, lack of consolidated case data, and opaque appointments, highlighting need f...
Corporate Law : The NCLAT ruled that provident fund dues are not corporate debtor assets and must be paid in full during CIRP, prioritizing them o...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court upheld joint insolvency proceedings against two interconnected real estate companies due to common management an...
Corporate Law : From 2022-23 to 2024-25, appeals filed at NCLAT rose steadily, with IBC cases forming the majority, reflecting active engagement i...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court ruled that CoC and RP can surrender financially burdensome assets voluntarily, clarifying moratorium under section 1...
Corporate Law : SC clarifies limits of High Court's writ powers in IBC cases and recognises Indian CIRP as foreign main proceeding in cross-border...
Corporate Law : NCLT & NCLAT eligibility criteria, insolvency rules, and case statistics from 2022-2024. Updates on financial irregularities and r...
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 : NCLAT held that a joint venture arrangement did not prevent insolvency proceedings where separate agreements clearly imposed suppl...
Company Law : A resolution applicant could not unilaterally alter its financial proposal through a last minute addendum after completion of the ...
Corporate Law : NCLAT held that the Corporate Debtor’s email offering payment subject to acceptance of a consequence sheet amounted to acknowled...
Company Law : The Appellate Tribunal upheld findings that the arrangement allowing the Successful Resolution Applicant to receive 50% of PUFE re...
Corporate Law : IBBI orders disciplinary action against Mr. S Vasudevan for alleged violations in the insolvency process of Mega Foods Products Ma...
Corporate Law : IBBI suspends IP for Failure to act during CIRP despite NCLAT directive and for Delay in convening Committee of Creditors (CoC) me...
Corporate Law : Read about the IBBI's disciplinary action against Mr. Venkata Sivakumar, an Interim Resolution Professional, for sharing asset mem...
Corporate Law : Govt issued a circular detailing vacancies for Judicial & Technical Members posts in NCLAT with detailed guide to apply for these...
Fema / RBI : It is clarified that cases admitted with National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT)/National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) unde...
NCLAT Delhi held that order holding Successful Resolution Applicant as ineligible is wholly erroneous and unsustainable since SRA duly satisfied all the of CIRP Regulations. Accordingly, impugned order is quashed and set aside.
NCLAT Delhi held that NCLT erred by not enforcing valid Family Settlement Agreement since such agreement is binding and enforceable for resolving family company disputes which involves oppression and management.
Tribunal held that home loans disbursed to buyers did not create a financial debt owed by the developer, as the Tripartite Agreement contained no repayment obligation on the builder. The ruling confirms that banks cannot claim creditor status without an explicit right to payment from the developer.
NCLAT ruled that GST dues of a corporate debtor, once admitted in CIRP, transform into operational debt, allowing assignment to a private creditor. The appeal challenging the debt transfer was dismissed.
Supreme Court ruled that CoC and RP can surrender financially burdensome assets voluntarily, clarifying moratorium under section 14(1)(d) is a protective shield, not a retention mandate.
The Court ordered transfer of the pending company appeal to the NCLAT Principal Bench after concerns arose from a judicial disclosure. The ruling ensures impartial adjudication and places broader issues before the Chief Justice.
Explains how recent tribunal decisions shaped the rules for selling corporate debtors as going concerns, highlighting compliance, clean-slate protection and process discipline.
The Tripartite Agreement Trap: When Banks Lose Financial Creditor Status in Real Estate Insolvency This case memo discussed the ruling of the Hon’ble NCLAT Principal Bench, New Delhi, in the matter of UCO Bank v. Debashish Nanda, RP Bulland Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., [Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 465 of 2024], where the Court held that […]
NCLAT Delhi held that liquidator duly allowed to remove all the movable assets of the Corporate Debtor lying at the leased premises since appellant/lessor never raised any objection regarding ownership of assets either during CIRP or during liquidation proceeding.
NCLAT Delhi held that in terms of regulation 33(2)(d) of the Liquidation Process Regulations [LPR], liquidator is required to obtain prior permission of the Adjudicating Authority for conduct of private sale. Here, since prior permission is not obtained the same tantamount to an infraction of LPR.
