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...
On an Application filed u/s. 7 by the UCO Bank against the Corporate Debtor M/s. Shree Shyam Pulp and Board Mills, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) commenced by Order dated 27.03.2019.
NCLAT Delhi held that arbitration notice evidences a pre-existing dispute, thus, section 9 application filed by Operational Creditor for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) rightly rejected.
NCLAT Delhi held that unilateral revocation of guarantee by the guarantor does not absolve him from his obligations under the guarantee agreement as the Financial Creditor has not agreed to such revocation.
NCLAT Chennai held that a right to judicial remedies is a right which is safeguarded by Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Thus, deprival of remedies available under Article 21 is unjustifiable and hence it is directed to revive back the company petition.
NCLAT Delhi held that resolution professional whose resolution plan was once rejected by the Committee of Creditors [CoC] is free to participate in fresh process initiated by fresh Form G for inviting Expression of Interest.
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. has held that the NCLT cannot exercise its jurisdiction over matters dehors the insolvency proceedings since such matters would fall outside the realm of IBC.
Where application under section 95 of Insolvency Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016 was filed, the same was permitted to be filed by a creditor in his individual capacity or jointly with other creditors or through a Professional (RP).
NCLAT Delhi held that benefit of extension of limitation under section 19 of the Limitation Act entitled to the operational creditor since last payment was made within period of three years and the same was acknowledged in writing by Corporate Debtor.
NCLAT Chennai held that rejection of application preferred u/s. 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code [I&B Code] not justified since existence of financial debt arising out of business transaction established.
NCLAT rules that pendency of an OTS proposal does not halt personal insolvency proceedings under Section 95 against personal guarantors.
