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...
Numerous appeals IBC get rejected by NCLAT on the grounds of them being time-barred. NCLAT articulates that it lacks the power to allow appeals filed after 45 days from the ‘date of the order’ of the Adjudicating Authority.
Stay up to date with the latest case law related to IBC in October, November and December 2022. Supreme Court finds OCs cannot enforce CIRP prematurely. AA must investigate plausible disputes, not feeble arguments.
NCLAT Chennai refused to condone the delay in filing of an appeal as in the presentation of the Appeal there was delay of 2 days, after 45 days, and the same is beyond a period of limitation.
Supreme Court held that as the appeal is pending before NCLAT, this court is desisting from entering a finding on the merits of the rival submissions which have been urged on behalf of the contesting parties.
NCLAT Delhi held that withdrawal application under section 12A of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 unsustainable once CoC (Committee of Creditors) approves a resolution plan.
NCLAT held that the Landowners who have not invested any money and are the collaborators in the development agreements cannot be termed as a financial creditor and the said transaction cannot be considered as disbursement against the time value of money.
NCLAT, Delhi held that adjudicating authority being the appointing authority of IRP/RP has due jurisdiction to pass an order for removal of the Resolution Professional.
NCLAT Delhi held that an application by the Resolution Professional under section 60(5) of IBC, 2016, to direct the tenant to vacant the property of Corporate Debtor, permissible for carrying out the duties entrusted to the IRP under Section 18 of the Code.
NCLAT Delhi held that impugned order is liable to be set aside as resolution professional didn’t took reasonable step to get the Corporate Debtor as going concern which is mandated as per Section 25(2)(h) of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
IFB Agro Industries Limited Vs Sicgil India Limited (Supreme Court of India) Recently, the Supreme Court in the landmark case of IFB Agro Industries Limited v. Sicgil India Limited and Ors held that NCLT does not have the power to exercise rectificatory jurisdiction under the section 59 of the Companies Act, 2013 for the matters […]
