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 condoned delay of five days in filing of an appeal as sufficient explanation given by the appellant for the condonation. Accordingly, delay condoned in terms of section 61(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
Thus, the prayer of the Appellant to exclude the commercial space from the Resolution Plan, could not have been accepted, nor any direction could have been issued for registration of Sale Deed.
NCLAT Delhi held that the amount given as share application money did not constitute a financial debt under Section 5(8) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 (IBC). Thus, CIRP application u/s. 7 rightly rejected.
The said business transaction was carried out between the period from 11.05.2019 to 13.10.2021, where an amount of Rs. 4,48,30,421 was said to be due to be paid to him.
NCLAT Chennai held that liquidator cannot resort to proceedings under section 61 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code for the purposes of the challenging direction issued to the IBBI.
NCLAT Delhi held that issue of closure of the factory to be raised against Industrial Court or Labour Court under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and not against adjudicating authority i.e. National Company Law Tribunal. Thus, appeal dismissed.
The Government defines the 30-day time limit for filing representations before NCLAT under the Companies Act, with no cases pending due to delays.
Government response on political appointments in NCLT/NCLAT and reasons behind delays in IBC case disposal.
NCLAT affirms CoC’s authority under IBC Section 33 to liquidate a Corporate Debtor before resolution plan confirmation. CoC’s commercial decisions are non-reviewable.
The Appellant- Operational Creditor had undertaken to provide services for production of Television Commercial, print shoot and digital content for the Respondent -Patanjali Paridhan Private Limited under the terms of proforma invoice dated 17.10.2018.
