IBC News
Employment Contract Disputes Cannot Be Adjudicated By NCLT/NCLAT Under IBC: NCLAT
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member) and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) has held that a dispute arising from an employment contract concerning the determination of emoluments and salaries to be paid to an employee of a company after his termination cannot be adjudicated by the National Company Law Tribunal...
No Provision Under IBC Mandating Resolution Professional To Share Valuation Report With Suspended Management Of Corporate Debtor: NCLAT
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that there is no provision in the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code), that mandates the valuation report to be shared with the suspended management of the Corporate Debtor. Therefore, the Resolution Professional cannot...
S. 61(2) IBC | Appeal Filed Beyond 45 Days Not Condonable By NCLAT : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court today (May 7) ruled that the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), acting as the Adjudicating Authority under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code), has no power to condone delays in filing appeals beyond the prescribed limit of 45 (30+15) days under Section 61(2) of the Code. Accordingly, the bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan set aside...
SEBI-Imposed Penalty Qualifies As A 'Fine' & Is An 'Excluded Debt' U/S 79(15)(A) Of IBC: NCLAT Chennai
The National Company Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Chennai Bench, comprising Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma (Member-Judicial) and Jatindranath Swain (Member-Technical), has upheld a decision passed by the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT, Hyderabad), admitting an application filed under Section 122(1) of the IBC, 2016. The Adjudicating Authority has earlier held that the penalty imposed by the...
No Cause of Action Arises Unless the Section 95 IBC Petition Is Admitted Against the Personal Guarantors: NCLAT Chennai
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Chennai Bench, comprising Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma (Member-Judicial) and Jatindranath Swain (Member-Technical), has ruled that the personal guarantors cannot challenge the appointment of the resolution professional and other procedural actions taken under Section 95 to 100 of the IBC, 2016. The tribunal observed that these...
NCLAT Dismisses Appeal Against DLF U/S 61 Of IBC For ₹4.65 Crores Debt, Says Multiple Exchanges Between Parties Prove Pre-Existing Dispute
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr. Barun Mitra and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) has dismissed an appeal filed by the contractor under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code) against DLF, claiming a debt of Rs. 4.65 crores, was dismissed on the grounds that multiple...
Absence Of Assignee Name In Balance Sheet Of Corporate Debtor Does Not Negate Applicability Of Section 18 Of Limitation Act: NCLAT
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that the fact that the debt was assigned to Assignee and the assignee was not named in the balance sheets does not negate the applicability of Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (Limitation Act). It further held that the debt...
Joint Application U/S 9 Of IBC Not Maintainable If Individual Claims Do Not Meet Threshold Limit U/S 4 Of IBC: NCLAT
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr. Baurn Mitra (Technical Member) and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) has held that in a joint application filed by operational creditors under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (the Code), the threshold limit prescribed under Section 4...
No Claim Can Be Submitted After Approval Of Resolution Plan By CoC If Creditor Was Aware Of CIRP Initiation Against Corporate Debtor: NCLAT
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member) and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) has held that when a creditor is well aware of the initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the corporate debtor but chooses not to file a claim before the Resolution Professional, it cannot be permitted...
Homebuyers Remain Financial Creditors U/S 5(8)(F) Of IBC Regardless Of Whether They Obtained RERA Recovery Certificates: NCLAT
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr.Barun Mitra (Technical Member) and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) has held that whether or not homebuyers have obtained recovery certificates from the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA), they remain financial creditors under Section 5(8)(f) of the...
Explained| Why Supreme Court Set Aside JSW's Resolution Plan For Bhushan Steel & Power Ltd
The Supreme Court in its recent decision to set aside the Resolution Plan submitted by JSW Steel for Bhushan Steel and Power Ltd, flagged the various procedural non-compliances done by the Resolution Professional and lack of commercial wisdom exercised by the Committee of Creditors (Coc)Holding that the Resolution Plan of JSW was illegal and contrary to the provisions of the Insolvency...
