Claims Submitted After Resolution Plan Approval Including Related Moratorium Period Not Allowed Under IBC: NCLT Bengaluru

The National Company Law Tribunal Bengaluru bench of K. Biswal (Judicial Member) and Manoj Kumar Dubey (Technical Member) has held that claims submitted after the approval of the Resolution Plan, including those related to the moratorium period, are not allowed under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The bench held that permitting such belated claims at a later stage...

Discrepancy In Addresses Used For Serving Demand Notice, NCLT Amravati Dismisses SBI's Petition For Initiating IRP Process Against Personal Guarantor

The National Company Law Tribunal, Amaravati special bench of Dr Venkata Ramakrishna Badarinath Nandula (Judicial Member) dismissed a petition filed by the State Bank of India under Section 95(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Discrepancies were found in the addresses used for the demand notice served to the personal guarantor and it was held that SBI failed to send the...

Weekly Digest Of IBC Cases: 22nd July 2024 To 28th July 2024

Supreme Court IBC | CIRP Of Holding Company Cannot Include Subsidiary's Assets: Supreme Court Case no. – Civil Appeal No. 4565 of 2021 Case Title – BRS Ventures Investments Ltd. v. SREI Infrastructure Finance Ltd. & Anr. The Supreme Court on Monday (July 23) held that a holding company is not the owner of its subsidiary's assets and thus, subsidiary assets cannot...

Directing Corporate Debtor To Civil Courts Or Arbitration For Admitted Dues Undermines IBC Objectives: NCLT Mumbai

The National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai bench of Kuldip Kumar Kareer (Judicial Member) and Anil Raj Chellan (Technical Member) had held that directing Corporate Debtor to seek resolution through civil courts or arbitration for even admitted dues would undermine the objectives of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Brief Facts: NTPC Limited (Respondent) issued two work orders...

No Provision To Waive Eligibility Requirements Under Section 43(3) Of the LLP Act For Investigation: NCLT New Delhi

The National Company Law Tribunal New Delhi bench of Dr. Sanjeev Ranjan (Technical Member) and Manni Sankariah Shanmuga Sundaram (Judicial Member) has held that there is no provision empowering it to relax / waive the eligibility requirements prescribed under Section 43(3) of LLP Act. Section 43(3) outlines the conditions under which the Central Government may appoint inspectors...

Stakeholders Can't Impose Penalties, Claim Dues From Corporate Debtor After Approval Of Resolution Plan: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula held once a resolution plan is accepted, the stakeholders cannot impose penalties or claim dues from the Corporate Debtor based on past liabilities. Brief Facts: OCL Iron and Steel Limited (“Petitioner”), established in 2006 as a 'coal-based direct reduced iron production' unit in Orissa, executed a Coal Mine...

NCLT Orders Liquidation Of Future Retail

The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Mumbai bench ordered the liquidation of Future Retail Limited (FRL) marking the end of the company's long-standing presence in India's retail market. The decision was made by a bench comprising Judicial Member Kuldip Kumar Kareer and Technical Member Anil Raj Chellan who held that the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) exceeded...

No Provision In IBC To Send Resolution Plan Back To CoC For Reconsideration: NCLT New Delhi

The National Company Law Tribunal New Delhi bench of Mahendra Khandelwal (Judicial Member) and Rahul Bhatnagar (Technical Member) has held that there is no provision in IBC allowing the Adjudicating Authority to send the resolution plan back to the Committee of Creditors (CoC) for reconsideration at the CoC's request. Further, the bench held that once a resolution plan...

Computation Of Limitation Must Be From Date Of E-Filing Of Appeal: NCLAT Principle Bench

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that the computation of limitation for NCLAT purposes must be from the date of e-filing the appeal. Brief Facts: The matter pertained to an appeal filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC)...

Section 10 Shouldn't Be Exploited And Abused By Corporate Debtor, Application After SARFAESI Proceedings Invalid: NCLAT Principle Bench

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Barun Mitra (Technical Member) held that the protective provisions of Section 10 of the IBC should not be exploited or abused by the Corporate Debtor to gain an unfair advantage. The bench noted that the SARFAESI proceedings initiated by the bank begun well...

Mere Recording Of Transaction As 'Inter-Corporate Deposit' In Balance Sheets Insufficient To Prove Financial Debt : NCLT Principal Bench

The National Company Law Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi of Chief Justice (Retd.) Ramalingam Sudhakar (President) and Avinash K. Srivastava (Technical Member) has held that mere recording of the transaction as “Inter-Corporate Deposit” in balance sheets is insufficient to establish it as financial debt without supporting documentation. The bench noted that the an...

Applications Under Sections 7, 9, Or 10 Of IBC Filed Before 2021 Amendment Act Retain Priority: NCLAT Principal Bench

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member), Naresh Salecha (Technical Member) and Indevar Pandey (Technical Member) has held that if an application under Sections 7, 9, or 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was already in process before 2021 Amendment Act came into force, then the amendments in Section...