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...
Only question to be looked in Section 9 Application is as to whether the objection raised by the Corporate Debtor opposing claim of the Operational Creditor is not a moonshine defense.
NCLAT Delhi held that Competition Commission of India (CCI) can only direct further investigation in a case of closure and not where DG has submitted report showing contravention of Competition Act 2002 by parties.
The proviso in Regulation 12(3) of CIRP Regulations, 2016 clearly stipulates that if any decision is taken by the committee, prior to the reconstitution, which in this case is the ratification of the fees and the expenses, its validity will not be affected.
NCLAT Delhi held that as per provisions of section 31 of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Adjudicating Authority is empowered to either accept or reject the resolution plan. Adjudicating Authority is not empowered to modify/ alter the conditions in the resolution plan.
NCLAT Delhi held that the Corporate Debtor are mandatorily required to pay security deposit for restoration of high tension electricity connection.
NCLAT Delhi held that scheme of compromise and arrangement is found to inflate the total payments by provisioning payment to creditors who are related to corporate debtor. Hence, impugned order allowing the Liquidator to proceed with the e-auction and not allowing any more time for consideration of the scheme proposed under section 230 of the Companies Act, 2013 is sustainable.
NCLAT Chennai held that there is no specified look back period for fraudulent trading under section 66 and hence losses caused to the Creditors are recovered in the event of the Liquidation and that the Directors who caused such losses are made liable to make good such losses.
NCLAT Chennai held that the word Person, is defined as per Section 3 (23)(d) of the I & B Code, which includes a Trust, therefore, there is no Fetter / Embargo or a Legal Impediment, for a Trust, to be a Resolution Applicant, in submitting a Resolution Plan
It is clarified that cases admitted with National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT)/National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 are also required to be reported under the suit-filed cases in reporting to the CICs.
𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗖𝗿𝗲𝗱𝗶𝘁𝗼𝗿’𝘀 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝗼𝗹𝘃𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝘀 𝗺𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗳𝗼𝗿 “𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗮𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗲” 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻 𝗶𝗳 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗽𝗮𝗹 𝗮𝗺𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗱𝘂𝗲.
