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 in absence of both disbursements directly to Corporate Debtor and default, attempt to invoke proceedings u/s. 7 of IBC unsustainable. Thus, since CIRP was fraudulent and malicious, dismissal u/s. 65 of IBC upheld.
NCLAT Delhi held that demand notice issued u/s. 95(4) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 [IBC] when sent to last known address as stipulated in Guarantee Deed is valid service of notice under established legal principles. Accordingly, appeals dismissed.
NCLAT rules allottee who cancelled unit by request cannot be financial creditor. Order directs payment of settled bank loan.
NCLAT Delhi held that failure of reconciliation of accounts qualifies as pre-existing dispute. Thus, order admitting application u/s. 9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ignoring pre-existing dispute is not justified. Hence, order is set aside.
NCLAT Delhi allows the appeal of Essar Oil & Gas, setting aside the NCLT Ahmedabad order admitting Section 9 application filed by Greeka Greens Solution.
On an application filed u/s. 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, the Corporate Debtor – Lavasa Corporation Limited was admitted to insolvency resolution process by order dated 30.08.2018.
NCLAT Delhi held that post approval of resolution plan both by CoC and the adjudicating authority, it cannot be reopened on the basis of claims being belatedly agitated by the appellant. Thus, admission of claim rightly rejected by adjudicating authority.
NCLAT Delhi held that beneficiary under the personal guarantee is fully entitled to initiate Personal Insolvency Resolution Process against personal guarantor u/s. 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC).
Supreme Court addresses IBC appeal delay; Power Infrastructure India vs. Power Finance Corp. NCLAT’s strict timeline adherence questioned.
NCLAT Delhi held that issuance of notice under rule 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority for Insolvency Resolution Process for Personal Guarantors to Corporate Debtors) Rules, 2019 doesn’t amount to invoking of guarantee.
