Weekly Digest Of IBC Cases: 29 March To 9 April 2023

Supreme Court IBC | Section 9 Petition Not To Be Dismissed If Few Invoices Are Time Barred But Remaining Invoices Are Not; Supreme Court Case Title: M/S Next Education India Pvt. Ltd. v M/S K12 Techno Services Pvt. Ltd. Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 270 The Supreme Court Bench comprising of Justice M.R. Shah and Justice C.T. Ravikumar, has held that when a petition under Section 9 of IBC is filed based on several invoices and some of the invoices are time barred, then NCLT must consider the remaining invoices which are within limitation and whether they cross the minimum threshold of Rs. 1 Crore. The Section 9 petition cannot be dismissed on the sole ground that some of the invoices are time barred. NCLAT “IBC Does Not Contemplate Multiplicity Of Applications Against The Same Personal Guarantor”: NCLAT Chennai Case Title: Union Bank of India v Mr. P.K. Balasubramanian Case No.: Comp. App. (AT) (CH) (Ins.) No. 293 of 2022 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), Chennai Bench, comprising of Justice M. Venugopal (Judicial Member) and Ms. Shreesha Merla (Technical Member), has held that when the Insolvency Resolution Process commences against a Personal Guarantor, the claims of all Creditors are taken care of. The IBC does not contemplate multiplicity of applications against the same Personal Guarantor. NCLAT Delhi Upholds Subsequent Reduction Of Claim By The IRP, Based On An Arbitral Award Case Title: Intec Capital Ltd. v Uday Kumar Bhaskar Bhat Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.361 of 2023. The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), Principal Bench, comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Shri Barun Mitra (Technical Member), has upheld the decision of the IRP whereby the claim of financial creditor was reduced after having been once admitted, based on an arbitral award which came into knowledge of IRP subsequently. The Bench held that the IRP is empowered to change the claim amount in the event any additional material comes into picture. Financial Creditor Who Does Not Attend Proceedings, Cannot Claim That Cirp Has Been Wrongly Conducted: NCLAT Delhi Case Title: Consolidated Finvest & Holdings Ltd. v Subhash Kumar Kundra Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 312 of 2023 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), Principal Bench, comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that a Financial Creditor who does not attend the CIRP proceeding, cannot be heard in saying that CIRP has wrongly been conducted. The Bench has also upheld the imposition of Rs. 10 Lakhs cost by the Adjudicating Authority on the Financial Creditor for filing frivolous application. GOOGLE V CCI: NCLAT Delhi Upholds Imposition Of Rs. 1337.76 Crores Penalty On Google, For Abuse Of Dominant Position In Android Market Case Title: Google LLC & Anr. v Competition Commission of India Case No.: Competition Appeal (AT) (ND) No.01 of 2023 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), Principal Bench, comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Dr. Alok Srivastava (Technical Member), has dismissed Google’s appeal against CCI order dated 20.10.2022, wherein the Competition Commission of India had imposed a penalty of Rs. 1337.76 Crores on Google for abusing its dominant position in the Android OS app store market, which resulted in denial of market access for competing search apps. NCLAT Chennai To Conduct Physical Hearings On Tuesday, Wednesday And Thursday The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), Chennai Bench, has issued a circular dated 01.04.2023, intimating that cases before NCLAT Chennai will be taken up through only Physical Mode on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. Further, matters would be heard in Virtual Mode every Monday and Friday. In case if any Member of NCLAT Chennai is on leave on a particular day, then the cases will be heard through Virtual Mode on that particular day. The aforesaid arrangement shall continue until further orders by the Chairperson or Judicial Member of NCLAT. Claim For Pre-CIRP Dues Not Been Filed, Electricity Department Not Entitled To Recover Such Dues Or To Disconnect Electricity: NCLAT Delhi Case Title: Swastik Aqua Ltd. & Anr. v Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. & Anr. Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 847 of 2022 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), Principal Bench, comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Shri Barun Mitra (Technical Member), has held that if the Electricity Department does not file any claim for its pre-CIRP electricity dues, then it is neither entitled to recover the pre-CIRP electricity dues, nor entitled to disconnect the connection of Corporate Debtor over such non-payment. Allocation Of Meagre Amount Cant Be A Ground To Question The Resolution ...

Weekly Digest Of IBC Cases: 29 March To 9 April 2023

Pallavi Mishra

Tags