NCLAT Judge Recuses From Case Saying He Was Approached By 'Higher Judiciary Member' To Favour A Party

The judicial member of National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench, Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, recused from hearing an insolvency matter, after observing that he was approached by "one of the most revered members of the higher judiciary" seeking an order favouring a particular party. The August 13 order passed by a bench of judicial member Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma and...

Employees Can't Be Paid Gratuity Dues In Addition To Payouts Allocated To Them In Resolution Plan: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that the employees of the corporate debtor cannot be paid gratuity dues in addition to the proposed payouts allocated to them in the Resolution Plan when it is clearly provided in the Resolution Plan. The present appeal has been filed...

Once Assignment Of Debt Is Declared Illegal, Assignee Loses Its Rights To File Application U/S 7 Of IBC: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that when the assignment of debt from the bank to the applicant is found to be illegal and unauthorized, the very basis of filing an application under Section 7 of the IBC is knocked out, and such an applicant cannot be allowed to file the...

Mere Rescheduling Of Payment Through New Agreement Does Not Change Repayment Obligations Under Original Agreement: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), New Delhi Bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member), has held that mere rescheduling of the payment date through an agreement does not alter the repayment obligations under the original Common Loan Agreement, nor does it result in novation. Therefore, an application under Section 7 of the IBC can be filed...

Resolution Professional's Failure To Individually Inform Homebuyers About Insolvency Proceedings Goes Against Principles Of IBC: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), New Delhi Bench of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain, Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member) and Mr. Indevar Pandey (Technical Member) has held that the failure of the Resolution Professional to individually inform the homebuyers about the insolvency proceedings as mandated under Regulation 6A of the CIRP Regulations, 2016, so they could file...

Once Claims Are Received By Investors Under Settlement Agreement, They Are Prohibited From Claiming Same Amount Under Resolution Plan: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), New Delhi Bench of Justice Mohd Faiz Alam Khan and Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member), has held that once an investor of the Corporate Debtor has received an amount under the Settlement Agreement and has given an unconditional undertaking to forgo all claims under the Resolution Plan, they are barred from claiming the same amount...

Information Utility Record Is Not Mandatory To Prove Debt And Default Under IBC: NCLT Hyderabad

The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Hyderabad Bench of Justice Shri. Rajeev Bhardwaj (Hon'ble Member) and Shri. Sanjay Puri - Hon'ble Member Technical has held that proving debt and default through records of default with the information utility is not mandatory. If debt and default are established through other evidence, a petition under Section 7 of the IBC can still...

[S. 252(3) Of Companies Act] Company Cannot Be Revived In Absence Of Substantial Investment Reflected In Balance Sheet: NCLT Chandigarh

The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Chandigarh Bench of Hon'ble Mr. Harnam Singh Thakur (Judicial Member) and Hon'ble Mr.Shishir Agarwal (Technical Member) has held that in the absence of substantial investment reflected in a company's balance sheet, it cannot be revived under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act. The present petition has been filed under Section 252(3) of...

Once CoC Agrees To Release Personal Guarantees Upon Payment, Invocation Cannot Be Directed By Adjudicating Authority: NCLAT New Delhi

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Barun Mitra (Member - Technical), has held that if CoC has itself agreed to release the personal guarantees upon completion of payment under the Resolution Plan, no directions can be issued to invoke such guarantees. Brief Background The appeal was...

Approved Resolution Plan Can't Be Set Aside Merely Due To Dissenting Financial Creditor's Dissatisfaction With Asset Valuation: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), New Delhi Bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that approval of a resolution plan cannot be interfered with merely on the grievance of a single financial creditor regarding improper asset valuation of the corporate debtor, when the valuer has, in fact, duly considered all assets and submitted...

Litigants Can't Be Forced To Argue On Merits When They Did Not File Reply To RP's Report U/S 99 Of IBC: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), New Delhi Bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that when a litigant has not filed a reply to the Resolution Professional's report submitted under Section 99 of the IBC, due to sufficiently explained causes, requiring them to argue on merits would be premature and unjustified. The present...

[Byju's Insolvency] No Adjudicatory Power Under IBC To Reconstitute CoC Or “Provisional Constitution” Of CoC: NCLAT, Chennai

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) Chennai bench comprising Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member) and Jatindranath Swain (Technical Member) has held that a Resolution Professional has no adjudicatory power under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”). Once the Committee of Creditors (“CoC”) is constituted, the Resolution Professional...