IBC Cases Weekly Round-Up: 22nd August To 29th August 2022

NCLAT Once Dissolution Application Is Filed After Liquidation, Adjudicating Authority Has No Discretion :NCLAT Delhi Case Title: Sudhir Kumar Goel & Ors. v M/s Shashi Oils and Fats Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 676 of 2021 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ("NCLAT"), Principal Bench, comprising of Justice Rakesh Kumar (Judicial Member) and Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra (Technical Member), has held that once the liquidation process is complete and an application is filed by the liquidator for dissolution of the Corporate Debtor, the Adjudicating Authority has no option but to pass an order of dissolution. Equity though not applicable to Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("IBC"), cannot come into play at this juncture. Claims Arising Out Of Grant Of Licence/Permission For Use Of Intellectual Property Rights Is An Operational Debt: NCLAT Delhi Case Title: Somesh Choudhary v Knight Riders Sports Private Limited & Ors. Case No.: Company Appeal (AT)(INS) No. 501 of 2021 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ("NCLAT"), Principal Bench, comprising of Justice Anant Bijay Singh (Judicial Member) and Ms. Shreesha Merla (Technical Member), has held that claims arising out of grant of an exclusive right and license to use intellectual property rights falls within the ambit of the definition of 'Operational Debt'. In this case, the 'Corporate Debtor' was permitted to use the trademark of 'KKR' in relation to its licensed products and hence we note that there was temporary transfer/permission to use, constituting 'provision of service' rendered by the first Respondent and therefore falls within the definition of service and any amounts 'due and payable' arising out of such service is an 'Operational Debt'. Time Barred Appeal Against Decree Does Not Amount Pre -Existing Dispute Under Insolvency And Bankruptcy Code,2016: NCLAT Case Details: Jangsher Singh Choudhary v. Ram Kripal Singh Construction Pvt. ltd. Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 739 of 2021 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) bench comprising of Justice Rakesh Kumar and Dr. Alok Srivastava held that a time barred appeal against the decree filed after the issuance of demand notice under Section 8 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 will not amount to a pre-existing dispute. Mobilization Advance Is An Operational Debt: NCLAT Delhi Case Title: Athena Demwe Power Ltd. v Abir Infrastructure Private Limited & Ors. Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.158 of 2022 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ("NCLAT"), Principal Bench, comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Justice M. Satyanarayana Murthy (Judicial Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member), has held that a mobilization advance given for mobilization of material and workforce is an operational debt. Reliance was placed on the Supreme Court judgment in M/s. Consolidated Construction Consortium Limited Vs. M/s. Hitro Energy Solutions Private Limited, Civil Appeal No. 2839 of 2020, in which it was held that the words "in respect of" in Section 5(21) has to be interpreted in a broad and purposive manner, in order to include all those who provide or receive operational services from the corporate debtor, which ultimately lead to an operational debt. Does Limitation Period For Filing Appeal Applies To Period For Curing Defects?:NCLAT Refers Question To Larger Bench Case Title: Mr. V R Ashok Rao v TDT Copper Limited Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 780 of 2022 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ("NCLAT"), Principal Bench, comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Justice N Satyanarayana Murthy (Judicial Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member), has observed that issue of delay in refilling of appeal is often coming before the NCLAT Bench for consideration. Accordingly, the NCLAT Bench has referred the following question to a larger Bench: 'whether limitation for filing an Appeal before NCLAT also governs the period for curing defect in the Appeal and does NCLAT have jurisdiction to condone the delay in refilling of appeal if it is beyond the limitation prescribed in Section 61 of the IBC or Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013?' Tribunal Cannot Interfere With Decision Of COC To Replace Resolution Professional :NCLAT Chennai Case Title: M/s IDBI Bank Limited v C.J. Davis Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 116 of 2022. The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ("NCLAT"), Chennai Bench, comprising of Justice M. Venugopal (Judicial Member) and Mr. Kanthi Narahari (Technical Member), had set aside the Adjudicating Authority's order disallowing the Committee of Creditors ("CoC") to replace the Resolution Professional under Section 22(3)(b) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("IBC"). The Bench held that the commercial wisdom of CoC...

IBC Cases Weekly Round-Up: 22nd August To 29th August 2022

Pallavi Mishra

Tags