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...
This appeal arises from an order dated 09.01.2024 by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai Bench-I. The Appellant, Mr. Puneet P. Bhatia, a suspended director of Barracks Retail India Pvt. Ltd.
In a recent ruling, the Delhi bench (NCLAT) while dismissing the appeal of the bank have held that Once the CIRP was initiated, the amount lying in the “No Lien Account”, is an asset of the Corporate Debtor if OTS did not materialize.
RP could not be blamed for having breached the IBC for the CoC to have approved the resolution plan of Parth with requisite majority share which action was taken by the CoC in the exercise of its commercial wisdom.
This is an Appeal under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against the dismissal of the Company Petition by which the Adjudicating Authority has dismissed the Section 7 Petition.
NCLAT Delhi held that even if the secured creditor proceeds to realise its security interest it is liable to pay liquidator fee as contemplated under Regulation 21A (2)(a) of the Liquidation Regulations, 2016.
NCLT Delhi held that admissible of application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) not justified since invoices covered under section 10A has to be excluded and accordingly amount claimed will be less than threshold limit of Rs. 1 Crore.
Aggrieved by the impugned order, the present appeal had been filed by the shareholder of the Corporate Debtor. The Corporate Debtor entered into Service Agreement with Sigma Supply Chain Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
NCLAT Delhi held that issuer raising amount by issuance of convertible debenture is clearly a ‘financial debt’ within the meaning of section 5(8) of the IBC. Accordingly, appeal dismissed.
The Liquidator published Sale Notice for reserve price on 12.08.2021 fixing sale price of 6.50. No bids came hence another e-Auction Notice was issued. The Appellant submitted its e-bid in pursuance of Sale Notice 12.09.2021.
NCLAT Delhi held that liquidator cannot create sub-lease over properties not owned by the corporate debtor without prior permission of concerned authority. Accordingly, action to sub-lease without specific permission is incorrect and illegal.
