IBC News
Once Pre-Existing Dispute With Regard To Operational Debt Is Established, Petition U/S 9 Of IBC Cannot Be Admitted: NCLAT
The NLCAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Barun Mitra (Technical Member) affirmed that in Section 9 proceeding, there is no need to enter into final adjudication with regard to existence of dispute between the parties regarding operational debt. If the existence of a dispute prior to filing of an insolvency petition is established and the defence raised is not...
Condonation Of Delay Is Case Specific, No Inflexible Rule Can Be Laid Down To Condone Delay U/S 61 Of IBC: NCLAT
The NLCAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Barun Mitra (Technical Member) and Arun Baroka (Technical Member) affirmed that the condonation of delay in filing of the Appeal is on facts of each case, no inflexible rule can be laid down while exercising jurisdiction to condone the delay. In Appeals filed under section 61 the IBC, the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to condone...
Monthly Digest Of IBC Cases: October 2024
SUPREME COURT 'Breaches Discipline Of Law Laid Down In IBC' : Supreme Court Disapproves Of HC Deferring CIRP Under Article 226 Case Title: CoC of KSK Mahanadi Power Company Ltd. v. Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd. and Ors. Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 815 The Supreme Court recently took exception to the Telangana High Court ordering the deferring of the Corporate...
Petition U/S 7 Of IBC Is Maintainable For Default Which Occurred Post Consent Decree: NCLAT
The NLCAT New Delhi bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Barun Mitra (Technical Member) and Arun Baroka (Technical Member) affirmed that a final judgment and/or decree of any Court or Tribunal or any Arbitral Award for payment of money, if not satisfied, would fall within the ambit of a financial debt for which the creditor is entitled to initiate proceedings under Section...
Resolution Professional Has Authority To Determine Creditor's Related Party Status: NCLAT
The NCLAT bench of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member), Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member) and Mr. Indevar Pandey (Technical Member) has held that the Resolution Professional (RP) has the authority to determine the related party status of a creditor. The Tribunal also held that In all cases where the Corporate Debtor is controlled by a trust, the trust would fall...
When Repayment Plan Is Not Submitted, Creditors Are Entitled To File Application For Bankruptcy Against Debtor U/S 121 Of IBC: NCLAT
The NCLAT New Delhi Bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Barun Mitra (Technical Member) and Arun Baroka (Technical Member) held that the creditors are entitled to file a Bankrupcty Application under section 121 of the IBC if no repayment plan as per section 106 of the IBC is submitted or if submitted but rejected by the Adjudicating Authority under section 115 of...
IBC Shall Prevail Over TRAI Act, Any Penalty Imposed By TRAI To Be Recovered As Per Scheme Of IBC: NCLAT
The NCLAT New Delhi Bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Barun Mitra and Arun Baroka held that the IBC being a special statute and having a non-obstante clause under section 238 of the IBC shall prevail over the TRAI Act therefore any penalty imposed by the TRAI on the corporate debtor would be recovered as per the scheme of the IBC. No special treatment can be given to the...
Supreme Court Orders Liquidation Of Jet Airways On Failure Of Resolution Plan
The Supreme Court invoked its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to order the liquidation of Jet Airways in view of the "peculiar and alarming" circumstance that the resolution plan has not been implemented for five years.The Court set aside the NCLAT Order which allowed the cash-strapped Jet Airways' ownership transfer to the Successful Resolution Applicant (SRA)...
Approved Resolution Plan Can Be Amended To Ensure Statutory Compliance U/S 31 Of IBC: NCLT Kolkata
The NCLT Kolkata Bench of Justices D. Arvind and Bidisha Banerjee held that the approved resolution plan can be amended to ensure that it complies with the statutory provisions under section 31(e) of the IBC. In this case, an application seeking amendment to the approved resolution plan was filed by the SRA to increase the public shareholdings to 5% as mandated by Rule 19(5) of...
Recall Notice Issued During Cut-Off Period U/S 10A Of IBC Doesn't Alter Date Of Default If Default Occurred Before Cut-Off Period: NCLAT
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), New Delhi bench of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member), Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member) and Mr. Indevar Pandey (Technical Member) has held that the issuance of a recall notice during the cut off period specified under Section 10A (i.e. from 25.03.2020 to 25.03.2021) does not defer the date of default if the default...
Settlement Plan U/S 12A Of IBC Cannot Be Considered By CoC After Approval Of Resolution Plan: NCLAT
The NCLAT New Delhi Bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan and Barun Mitra affirmed that a settlement proposal under Section 12A of the IBC cannot be put before the CoC after the CoC has approved the resolution plan. The tribunal further observed that with the approval of the resolution plan by the CoC, the plan becomes inter se binding between the CoC and the SRA and hence no settlement...