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 initiated proceedings before the Debts Recovery Tribunal does not preclude Financial Creditors to take remedy under Section 7, which is a special remedy provided under the IBC.
NCLAT held that contempt proceedings can only be maintained if non-compliance is attributable to an individual, rather than company as an inanimate juristic person
NCLAT Chennai dismisses appeal in P. Jayagovind vs Bijoy Prabhakaran case due to full implementation of the resolution plan under IBC Sections 30 & 31.
NCLAT Chennai rules against Lanco Infratech Employees Welfare Association’s claim for retention allowance, emphasizing lack of legal entitlement.
NCLAT dismisses appeal challenging rejection of a resolution plan after a fresh plan was accepted, rendering the appeal infructuous.
NCLAT Delhi held that based on recommendation made by the resolution professional, application under section 95 of IBC, 2016 is admitted. Notably, also held that application under section 95 is preferred within prescribed time limit.
NCLAT Chennai owing to the situation prevailing due to Covid-19, the earnest money should not be permitted to be forfeited, where a subsequent fresh auction has taken place and the property has been sold at a higher price.
NCLAT Chennai quashes NCLT’s order and grants Dunzo Digital Pvt. Ltd. a final chance to file objections to proceedings under Section 9 of the I&B Code.
It was the case of the appellant that he acquired rights from the respondent in pursuant to the agreement dated 07.09.2006. Property (shop) in question were part of government grant hence does not require registration.
Appellant-personal guarantor had signed a deed of guarantee for a corporate debtor’s credit facilities. Following the debtor’s default, the bank issued a Section 13(2) notice demanding Rs. 32.60 crore from the appellant.
