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...
Liberty House Group Pte. Ltd. Vs State Bank of India & Ors. (NCLAT Delhi) Mr. Virendra Ganda, learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant(s) submits that the amount in terms of the earlier order dated 21st January, 2020 has been paid. Mr. Joy Saha, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of ‘Committee of Creditors’ has also […]
It is, for the matter of reality, that there is no mandate under the I&B Code which provides that whether the Resolution Plan’s value shall be more than the liquidation value of the Corporate Debtor. It is this perplexing issue that the case of Orchid Pharma Insolvency deals with. Th
Facts of the Case Reliance Jio Infocom Limited (‘Reliance Jio’) is a Public Limited Company registered under Companies Act 2013. It is an Indian Telecommunication Company and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Reliance Industries, headquartered in Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. It operates a national LTE network with coverage across all 22 telecom circles. Reliance Jio filed a […]
The proceedings of the sixth meeting of the Board of Directors of ‘Tata Sons Limited’ held on Monday, 24th October, 2016 so far as it relates to removal and other actions taken against Mr. Cyrus Pallonji Mistry (11th Respondent) is declared illegal and is set aside.
Regional Director Vs Real Image LLP (NCLAT) Our Today’s article is about the Basic question that if an Indian LLP wants to process for the Amalgamation into a Indian Company, whether it required to obtain the registration under section 366 In the case of Regional Director, Southern Region, & Ors. V. Real Images LLP. If […]
In pursuance of judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Government has decided to set up a bench of National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Chennai. This was stated by Shri Anurag Singh Thakur, Union Minister for State for Finance &Corporate Affairs, in a written reply to a question in Lok Sabha today.
NCLAT, recently, vide its order dated 18.11.2019 in the matter of State Bank of India v Anuj Bajpai, has held that the disqualified persons under Section 29A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 , are completely and irrevocably barred from having access to the assets of the Corporate Debtor. Details of the Order has been discussed below:
We direct the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) to complete the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) within 90 days from today. In the first 45 days, it will be open to the IRP to invite revised resolution plan only from Suraksha Realty and NBCC respectively, who were the final bidders and had submitted resolution plan on the earlier occasion and place the revised plan(s) before the Committee of Creditors (CoC), if so required, after negotiations and submit report to the adjudicating authority NCLT within such time.
The order of ‘admission’ is challenged on the ground that the matter having been heard by two Hon’ble Members and the final order could not have been passed by Hon’ble Member (Judicial).
Promoter, if ineligible under Section 29A cannot make an application for Compromise and Arrangement for taking back the immovable and movable property or actionable claims of the ‘Corporate Debtor’.