Company Law : The article examines the Hamlin Trust ruling, where the NCLAT held that CFO appointments must satisfy Section 203 eligibility requ...
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 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 invoice discounting through the TReDS platform does not convert operational debt into financial debt. The appeal w...
Corporate Law : Madras HC held that a pending NCLAT appeal did not prevent PNB from conducting a Swiss Challenge auction after the OTS proposal wa...
Company Law : The NCLAT held that CFO nominees must satisfy the eligibility requirements under Section 203 of the Companies Act. It set aside th...
Income Tax : NCLAT held that a single application covering multiple years and company officers is maintainable in the absence of any statutory ...
Corporate Law : Tribunal held that proviso to Regulation 7A allows insolvency professionals to continue assignments already underway even after th...
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 Chennai held that initiation of the IRP proceeding u/s. 95 of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against personal guarantor upheld as no principle of natural justice has been violated, and that the Resolution Professional has given sufficient opportunities.
NCLAT Chennai held that post completion of liquidation process and property of Corporate Debtor is handed over to Successful Auction Purchaser, order u/s. 33(2) of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, directing liquidation of corporate debtor’s cannot be revoked.
NCLAT Delhi held that granting waiver u/s. 244(1)(b) of the Companies Act, 2013 justified in a petition alleging oppression and mismanagement in the Calcutta Cricket & Football Club. Accordingly, appeal dismissed.
Thus, we do not find any error in the impugned order for the purpose of interference, therefore, the present appeal is found to be without any merit and the same is hereby dismissed though without any order as to costs.
NCLAT Delhi held that when the debt invoking the guarantee falls between the 10A period application u/s. 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is barred by limitation. Accordingly, order rejecting application upheld.
NCLAT Chennai held that payments from Successful Resolution Applicant will be done on pro-rata basis amongst the creditors but the Dissenting Creditor has to be pad first before other Financial Creditors. Accordingly, appeal stands allowed.
NCLAT Delhi held that financial creditor entitled to file an application under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code even after breach of settlement agreement since nature of debt doesn’t change. Thus, order admitting section 7 application sustained.
NCLAT Delhi held that appeal against an order of NCLT initiating insolvency resolution process of personal guarantor lays to NCLAT. Thus, personal guarantor eligible to file an appeal u/s. 61 of IBC against order issued u/s. 100.
Discrepancies in financials prompted the Appellant to seek clarifications from Personal Guarantors – Respondents No. 2 and 3, and the late Mr. Bajrang Dass Aggarwal, who provided explanations on 25.02.2020.
NCLAT Delhi held that penalty under section 27(b) of the Competition Act, 2002 imposable since Google has abused its dominant position and has violated Section 4(2)(a)(i) and 4(2)(e) of the Competition Act, 2002.
