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...
Recently, a three judge bench of NCLAT in V. Padmakumar vs. Stressed Assets Stabilisation Fund (SAFS) & Anr. considered the issue that ‘whether admission of debt in balance sheet would amount to acknowledgement of debt which would further amount to extension of period of limitation as per Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (Limitation Act)’.
: In absence of any prime facie opinion framed, that the combination of Walmart-Flipkart was likely to cause or had caused appreciable adverse effect on the competition within the relevant market in India, the sanction of of Walmart’s acquisition of Flipkart by Competition Commission of India (CCI) was justified.
Justice Mukhopadhaya raised serious concerns with regard to the constant delays in insolvency proceedings and said that the Members of NCLAT and NCLTs must cut the time period of insolvency proceedings short and focus on quicker disposal of cases. He emphasised that there are only limited grounds to argue at the stage of admission and that the Members of NCLTs should admit or dismiss the cases adhering to the prescribed time limits.
Bimalkumar Manubhai Savalia Vs Bank of India (NCLAT) Conclusion: Proceedings initiated or pending in DRT, either initiated under SARFAESI or under debts and due to Banks and Financial Institutions could not be taken into account for the purposes of limitation. Therefore, the application filed by Bank before the Adjudicating Authority on 30.08.2018 was beyond the […]
In this article we will be discussing the aforesaid Question, as well as whether NCLT can intervene the commercial wisdom and decision of CoC. We will be discussing various judgments of NCLAT and Supreme Court of India which would be relevant for shedding some light on the aforesaid questions.
Penalty was leviable on assessee for contravention of provisions of section 4(2)(a)(i) of the Competition Act, 2002 (Act) by imposing unfair conditions upon the buyers under Gas Supply Agreement (GSA) and for abusing dominant position.
Various acts of IL&FS like over borrowing were prejudicial to the public interest which had cascading impact on various sectors of the economy and the red signals were raised against the IL&FS by the country and even by the department of economic affairs of the country, therefore, before passing any appropriate order in public interest and to save the economy of the Country from collapse, if the Tribunal was of the opinion that it required to give appropriate hearing to the concerned parties, including those who audited ‘IL&FS’ and/ or those who have managed or were concerned with ‘IL&FS’ or its Group Companies, it could not be held to be illegal.
Pacific World Shipping PTE Ltd. Vs Dadi Impex Pvt. Ltd. (NCLAT) The main grievance of the Appellant is that the Operational Creditors have been given only token 2% of their claims admitted while the Financial Creditors are given 100% of their claims. The learned Counsel for the Bank has then relied on Regulation 37 of […]
Following the principle of justice and equity, the defaulting company “Unitech” was liable to repay the amount to its deposit holders principal along with the future interest @12.5% per annum from the date of maturity of the respective FDR till receipt thereof alongwith Rs.50000/- each to assessees towards cost of litigation, costs etc
Neeraj Jain Vs Cloudwalker Streaming Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (NCLAT) we have found that demand notice delivered under Section 8(1) of the Code was not proper and was also incomplete. The Operational Creditor failed to submit any documents to prove in existence of the Operational debt and the amount in The Operational Creditor also failed to […]
