Nominal Index Ganesh Chandra Bamrana and Ors. vs. Rukmani Gupta, CRL. M.C. 6170/2022 & CRL. M.A. 24285/2022, CRL.M.C. 6178/2022 & CRL.M.A. 24297/2022 Ashmeet Singh Bhatia Versus Rakesh Verma Authorised Representative and Anr., Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1924 of 2024 & I.A. No. 7124 of 2024 M/s Acute Daily Media Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Versus M/s...
Nominal Index
Ganesh Chandra Bamrana and Ors. vs. Rukmani Gupta, CRL. M.C. 6170/2022 & CRL. M.A. 24285/2022, CRL.M.C. 6178/2022 & CRL.M.A. 24297/2022
Ashmeet Singh Bhatia Versus Rakesh Verma Authorised Representative and Anr., Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1924 of 2024 & I.A. No. 7124 of 2024
M/s Acute Daily Media Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Versus M/s Rockman Advertising and Marketing (India) Ltd. & Ors., Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1480 of 2024
Pawan Kumar Versus Central Bank of India & Ors., Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1095 of 2024
Amit Yogesh Satwara Versus Incred Financial Services Limited, Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1584 of 2024
Mirra & Mirra Industries vs. Mrs. B. Usha Rani & Anr., RA (SA): 165/2018 and RA (SA):178/2018
Anup Kumar Liquidator of Independent TV …Appellant Versus Ministry of Information and Broadcasting & Ors., I.A. No. 6903 of 2024 in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1913 of 2024
Comet Performance Chemicals Private Limited Versus Aarvee Denims and Exports Limited, Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1878 of 2024
New India Color Company Ltd. Versus Samtex Desinz Pvt. Ltd. (In CIRP) & Anr, Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1255 of 2022 & I.A. No. 3839 of 2022
UCO Bank Vs Smt. Nishu Goel, IB-355/ND/2024
Fortune Chemicals Limited vs. Ashok Kumar Jaiswal & Anr.,Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1263 of 2022
Nagaraj V. Mylandla & Ors. v. Financial Software and Systems Pvt. Ltd. and Ors., Comp App (AT) (CH) No.84/2024
Canara Bank Versus Sh. Vivek Kumar, Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 390 of 2023 & I.A. No. 1301, 1302 of 2023, 7105, 7610 of 2024
Amit Nehra & Anr. Versus Pawan Kumar Garg Resolution Professional Puma Realtors Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1365 of 2023
Delhi High Court
Directors Cannot Be Held Liable For Dishonour Of Cheques After Commencement Of CIRP Proceedings: Delhi High Court
Case Title: Ganesh Chandra Bamrana and Ors. vs. Rukmani Gupta
Case Number: CRL. M.C. 6170/2022 & CRL. M.A. 24285/2022, CRL.M.C. 6178/2022 & CRL.M.A. 24297/2022
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Amit Mahajan has reiterated that proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 for dishnonour of cheque cannot continue against individuals once a moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) is in effect.
NCLAT
Authorised Representative Can Be Replaced By Following Procedure Provided Under Regulation 16(3A) Of CIRP Regulations: NCLAT
Case Title: Ashmeet Singh Bhatia Versus Rakesh Verma Authorised Representative and Anr.'
Case Number:Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1924 of 2024 & I.A. No. 7124 of 2024
The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr. Barun Mita (Technical Member) and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) has held that the Authorised Representative can be replaced by following the procedure engrafted under Regulation 16(3A) of the CIRP Regulations therefore the application of an individual homebuyer seeking replacement of the Authorised Representative before the Adjudicating Authority cannot be entertained.
Admission Order Of Application U/S 7 Of IBC Can Be Recalled If Fraud Or Malicious Intent Is Proved U/S 65 Of Code: NCLAT
Case Title: M/s Acute Daily Media Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Versus M/s Rockman Advertising and Marketing (India) Ltd. & Ors.
Case Number:Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1480 of 2024
The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr. Barun Mita (Technical Member) and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) has held that when CIRP proceedings are initiated fraudulently or maliciously, the Adjudicating Authority has jurisdiction under the IBC to consider the allegations of fraudulent and malicious initiation of CIRP proceedings in terms of Section 65 and recall the CIRP admission order.
Initiation Of Recovery Proceedings Before DRT Does Not Preclude Financial Creditor From Filing Application U/S 7 Of IBC: NCLAT
Case Title:Pawan Kumar Versus Central Bank of India & Ors.
Case Number: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1095 of 2024
The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) has held that initiation of recovery proceedings before the DRT does not prohibit financial creditors from filing an application under section 7 of the code.
When Entire Liability Is Not Discharged After Selling Pledged Shares, Application U/S 7 IBC Can Be Filed To Claim Remaining Amount: NCLAT
Case Title: Amit Yogesh Satwara Versus Incred Financial Services Limited
Case Number: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1584 of 2024
The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) has held that when the entire liability of the corporate debtor after selling the pledged shares is not discharged, an application under section 7 of the IBC can be filed for claiming the remaining amount.
166 Days Delay In Re-Filing Appeal Cannot Be Condoned In Absence Of Genuine And Plausible Explanation: NCLAT
Case Title: Anup Kumar Liquidator of Independent TV …Appellant Versus Ministry of Information and Broadcasting & Ors.
Case Number: I.A. No. 6903 of 2024 in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1913 of 2024
The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that a delay of 166 in re-filing an appeal cannot be condoned in the absence of a plausible and genuine explanation offered for the same.
Interest On Operational Debt Cannot Be Claimed Unless There Is An Express Agreement: NCLAT
Case Title: Comet Performance Chemicals Private Limited Versus Aarvee Denims and Exports Limited
Case Number:Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1878 of 2024
The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) has held that as per section 5(21) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, interest on invoices cannot be claimed by the operational creditor in the absence of any stipulations in the agreement to this effect.
Commercial Wisdom Of CoC In Opting For Liquidation And Rejecting Resolution Plan Of Ineligible Applicant Is “Non-Justiciable”: NCLAT
Case Title: Fortune Chemicals Limited vs. Ashok Kumar Jaiswal & Anr.
Case Number: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1263 of 2022
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi has held that the commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) in rejecting a resolution plan and opting for liquidation is “non-justiciable”. The Appellant-Director was disqualified under Section 164(2) of the Companies Act, thereby rendering the him ineligible to be a Resolution Applicant under Sections 29A(e) and 29A(j) of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). The Tribunal held that the decision of the CoC to reject the Appellant's Resolution Plan cannot be interfered with.
Appeal U/S 61 Of IBC Is Not Maintainable After Dissolution Of Corporate Debtor U/S 54: NCLAT
Case Title:New India Color Company Ltd. Versus Samtex Desinz Pvt. Ltd. (In CIRP) & Anr
Case Number: Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1255 of 2022 & I.A. No. 3839 of 2022
The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member) and Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member) has held that an appeal under section 61 of the IBC cannot be entertained after the dissolution of the corporate debtor under section 54 of the code.
Appeal U/S 421 Of Companies Act Not Maintainable Against Interlocutory Order Permitting AGM, No Substantive Rights Affected: NCLAT
Case Title: Nagaraj V. Mylandla & Ors. v. Financial Software and Systems Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.
Case No.: Comp App (AT) (CH) No.84/2024
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal has recently held that an appeal under Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013, against an interlocutory order permitting holding of an Annual General Meeting (AGM) without affecting the substantive rights of the appellants is not maintainable. The Tribunal emphasized that procedural orders which do not determine substantive rights cannot be appealed under Section 421.
NCLAT Upholds Status Of Canara Bank As Financial Creditor For Providing Loans To Homebuyers Of CD, Distinguishes Value Infracon Judgment
Case Title: Canara Bank Versus Sh. Vivek Kumar
Case Number:Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 390 of 2023 & I.A. No. 1301, 1302 of 2023, 7105, 7610 of 2024
The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member) and Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member) upholds the claims of the Canara Bank for the loans advanced to the corporate debtor on behalf of the Homebuyers on the ground that a specific clause was mentioned in the tripartite agreement executed between the parties that in case of default made by the borrower, the builder was obligated the refund the entire amount to the bank.
Claims Filed Subsequent To Cut-Off Date Shall Be Dealt With As Per Resolution Plan Approved By Adjudicating Authority: NCLAT
Case Title: Amit Nehra & Anr. Versus Pawan Kumar Garg Resolution Professional Puma Realtors Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
Case Number: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1365 of 2023
The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) has held that claims filed subsequent to cut off date shall be dealt with as per Resolution Plan approved by the Adjudicating Authority.
NCLT
Limitation Period To Reset When Part-Payment Of Debt Is Made By Personal Guarantor U/S 19 Of Limitation Act: NCLT Delhi
Case Title: UCO Bank Vs Smt. Nishu Goel
Case Number: IB-355/ND/2024
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Delhi comprising of Justice Subrata Kumar Dash (Member Technical) and Justice Ashok Kumar Bhardwaj (Member Judicial) dismissed an appeal filed by the personal guarantors of the principal debtor M/s VCRM Petrochemicals Pvt. Ltd. stating that the appeal falls within the ambit of limitation period as prescribed under Section 19 of Limitation act, 1963 and that the Liquidator can institute a Section 95(4) proceedings against the personal guarantors.
DRAT
Sale Arising From Collusive Suit Where Bank Isn't Party Does Not Bind Either Bank Or Auction Purchaser: DRAT Chennai
Case title: Mirra & Mirra Industries vs. Mrs. B. Usha Rani & Anr.
Case Number: RA (SA): 165/2018 and RA (SA):178/2018
The Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal Chennai bench of Justice G. Chandrasekharan (Chairperson) has held that a sale arising from a collusive suit, where the bank was not a party to the proceedings, does not bind the bank or the auction purchaser of the property under SARFAESI proceedings.