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 claim as a financial creditor of the Corporate Debtor filed after delay of 388 days cannot be entertained post-approval of the Resolution Plan by the CoC with 90.66% majority. Accordingly, appeal dismissed.
NCLAT Delhi held that appellant to be treated as secured Financial Creditor based on the registered charge with CERSAI in accordance with Regulation 21 of the IBBI (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016. Accordingly, appeal allowed and order set aside.
NCLAT Chennai held that delay of 26 days in filing of the report under Section 106 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, by the Resolution Professional condoned as reasonable cause of non-submission of the repayment plan and relevant information by the Guarantor shown.
NCLAT Delhi held that default occurred on 25th March 2023 which is well beyond the outer limit of section 10A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 which squarely brings the claim within the permissible scope of Section 7 of the IBC. Thus, admission of section 7 application justified.
NCLAT Chennai held that resolution professional is permitted to issue fresh Form G and to invite Expression of Interest (EoI) from new and interested eligible Prospective Resolution Applicants subject to the stipulations that the CIRP process has to be completed in a time bound manner.
NCLAT Delhi held that it is well settled proposition of law that for a pre-existing dispute to be a ground to nullify an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Accordingly, adjudicating authority rightly rejected application u/s. 9.
NCLAT upheld the dismissal of IBC proceedings against Kerala Medical Services Corporation, citing D.J. Laboratories’ material concealment of facts regarding pending disputes and a demand notice reply.
Delhi NCLAT dismisses appeal challenging court records without correction application, reiterating late replies hinder case conclusion. Cites Supreme Court precedent.
NCLAT Delhi held that application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code for initiation of CIRP duly admissible since One-Time Settlement with guarantors didn’t amount to full and final satisfaction of loan vis-à-vis the Corporate Debtor.
NCLAT Delhi held that the capital investment under the reseller agreement lacks the essential ingredients of financial debt under Section 5(8) (f) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Accordingly, dismissal of petition u/s. 7 for CIRP justified.
