NCLAT Delhi Evokes Doctrine Of 'Approbate & Reprobate', Imposes Rs. 1 Lakh Cost On Creditor, Allowing Action For Contempt

Case Title: Premjayanti Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs. Shivam Water Treaters Pvt. Ltd.

Case No.: Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 124 of 2023

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member), Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member), and Mr. Indevar Pandey (Technical Member) evokes the Doctrine of 'Approbrate and Reprobrate' imposing a cost of Rs. 1 Lakh with allowing appropriate proceedings under the provisions of the Contempt of Court Act.

NCLAT Delhi: Loan Recall Notice Date Shall Not Constitute Relevant Date Of Default Under IBC, Partial Payments Cannot Absolve CD From Default Status

Case Title: Milind Kashiram Jadhav vs State Bank of India

Case No.: Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1589 of 2023

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member), and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) held that part payments between the Non-Performing Asset (“NPA”) classification and loan recall notice cannot mean that loan recall notice shall constitute the relevant date of default under the IBC. Further, partial payments on the part of the Corporate Debtor cannot absolve it from default status.

NCLAT Delhi: Relevant Date To Determine Ineligibility To Submit Resolution Plan Is Date Of Submission Of Plan By Resolution Applicant

Case Title: Namdev Hindurao Patil vs. Virendra Kumar Jain, Liquidator, Warana Dairy and Agro Industries Ltd. and Ors.

Case No.: Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 858 of 2023 & I.A. No. 2925 of 2024

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member), Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member), and Mr. Indevar Pandey (Technical Member) held that the relevant date to determine the ineligibility to submit a Resolution Plan is on the date on which the Resolution Plan was first submitted by the Resolution Applicant.

NCLAT Delhi: Absence Of GST Refund/ITC Claim In Demand Notice Or Form 5 By OC Can't Become Ground Of Default For CIRP U/S 9 Of IBC

Case Title: R.B. Singh and Anr. vs. Rashmi Cement Ltd. and Anr.

Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1187 of 2023

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member), and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) held that if no Goods and Services Tax (“GST”) refund/ Input Tax Credit (“ITC”) claim has been included in the Demand Notice under Section 8 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”) or in Form 5 by the Operational Creditor, the same cannot become a ground of default on which Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) under IBC can be initiated.

Decision Taken By New Resolution Professional Cannot Be Objected By Erstwhile Resolution Professional: NCLAT Delhi

Case Title: Partha Sarathy Sarkar vs Union of India & Ors.

Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.576 of 2024

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, comprising Shri Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Shri Barun Mitra and Shri Arun Baroka (Technical Members), in Partha Sarathy Sarkar vs Union of India & Ors. has held that the decision taken by New Resolution Professional cannot be objected by the Erstwhile Resolution Professional after replacement who is now proceeding with the CIRP.

NCLAT Delhi: Adjudicating Authority Can Extend Payment Timelines Under Resolution Plan Without Express Concurrence Of CoC

Case Title: Ashok Dattatray Atre and Ors. vs. State Bank of India and Ors.

Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) Nos. 221 and 222 of 2024

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) held that the Adjudicating Authority can extend payment timelines under the Resolution Plan without the express concurrence of the Committee of Creditors ('CoC').

When Claims And Counter Claims Are Involved, Liquidator Cannot Decide The Same: NCLAT Chennai

Case Title: M/s. FLSmidth Private Limited vs Lanco Infratech Ltd

Case No.: TA (AT) No.207/2021 (CA (AT) (Ins) No.1353/2019)

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Chennai Bench, comprising Shri Justice Venugopal M. (Judicial Member) and Shri Jatindranath Swain (Technical Member), while adjudicating an application under Section 61 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC, 2016”) in M/s. FLSmidth Private Limited vs Lanco Infratech Ltd. has held that when claim and counter-claims are involved Liquidator cannot decide the same.

NCLAT Delhi: Dispute On Contractual Conditions Concerning Place Of Delivery And Obligation Towards Transport Of Goods Qualifies As “Pre-Existing Dispute” Under IBC

Case Title: Sanam Fashion & Design Exchange Ltd. vs. Ktex Nonwovens Pvt. Ltd.

Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1234 of 2023

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member), Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member), and Mr. Indevar Pandey (Technical Member) held that the dispute between the parties regarding contractual conditions relating to place of delivery and obligation of parties for transport of goods is a “pre-existing dispute” under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”).

NCLAT Delhi: Extension Of Time In Payment Is Not Modification Of Resolution Plan

Case Title: Ashok Dattatray Atre and Ors. vs. State Bank of India and Ors.

Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) Nos. 221 and 222 of 2024

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) held that an extension of time in payment is not a modification of the Resolution Plan.

NCLT

Loan Amount Acknowledged As “Long-Term Borrowings” Has Commercial Effect And Covered U/S 5(8) Of IBC: NCLT Mumbai

Case Title: Metamorphosis Trading LLP vs. Membrane Filters (India) Private Limited

Case No.: C.P.(IB)-880(MB)/C-III/2022

The National Company Law Tribunal ('NCLT') Mumbai Bench, comprising Ms. Lakshmi Gurung (Judicial Member) and Sh. Charanjeet Singh Gulati (Technical Member), while adjudicating an application under Section 7 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC, 2016”) in the case of Metamorphosis Trading LLP vs Membrane Filters (India) Private Limited has held that the loan amount acknowledged in the books of the Corporate Debtor as “Long-term Borrowings” is a loan having commercial effect of borrowing and is therefore, covered under section 5(8) of the I&B Code as financial debt.

MSME Interest Cannot Be Claimed To Trigger Threshold Limit Under IBC If MSME Certificate Obtained Post Appointed Date: NCLT Mumbai

Case Title: SHAARC Projects Limited vs. Hindustan Construction Company Limited

Case No.: C.P. (I.B) No. 1077/MB/2021

The National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”), Mumbai Bench, comprising Justice Reeta Kohli (Judicial Member) and Madhu Sinha (Technical Member) has held that an Operational Creditor cannot combine interest under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (“MSMED”) to the principal amount to meet the threshold limit under section 4 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code”) if it has obtained the MSME certificate post appointed date under section 16 read with section 2(b) of MSMED.

Undated Certificate Of Bankers Book Evidence Act Valid Under IBC: NCLT Chandigarh

Case Title: Canara Bank vs. Laggar Industries Limited

Case No.: CP (IB) 29/CHD/PB/2022

The National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”), Chandigarh Bench, comprising Mr. Harnam Singh Thakur (Judicial Member) and Mr. L.N. Gupta (Technical Member) has held that an undated certificate of Bankers Book Evidence Act, 1891, (“Act”) constitutes a valid certificate for regulation 2A of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 (“IBBI Regulations”).

Assignee Of A Financial Creditor Also A Financial Creditor U/S 5 (7) Of IBC: NCLT Kolkata

Case Title: Assets Care & Reconstruction Enterprise Limited vs Ankit Metal & Power Limited

Case No.: C.P (IB) No.91/KB/2023

The National Company Law Tribunal ('NCLT') Kolkata Bench, comprising Shri Rohit Kapoor (Judicial Member) and Shri Balraj Joshi (Technical Member), while adjudicating an application under Section 7 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC, 2016”) in Assets Care & Reconstruction Enterprise Limited vs Ankit Metal & Power Limited has held that the assignee of a Financial Creditor is also a Financial Creditor within the scope of Section 5(7) of IBC, 2016 and is thus competent to file the case under Section 7 of IBC.

Detention Charges Come Within The Purview Of Operational Debt: NCLT Mumbai

Case Title: ABC India Ltd. vs Prabhakar Engineers Pvt. Ltd.

Case No.: C.P. No. 4216/MB/2019

The National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, comprising Ms. Reeta Kohli, (Judicial Member) and Madhu Sinha (Technical Member), while adjudicating an application under Section 9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC, 2016”) in ABC India Ltd. vs Prabhakar Engineers Pvt. Ltd. has held that Detention Charges are very much a part of the Transportation Charges and hence a part of Operational Debt.

CIRP Can Be Initiated Against The Corporate Debtor Despite Principal-Agent Relationship Between CD And Ultimate Client: NCLT Mumbai

Case Title: S.A. Consultants & Forwarders Pvt. Ltd. v. Prime Cargo Movers & Logistics Pvt. Ltd.

Case No.: C.P. (IB) 1049/MB/2020

The National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”), Mumbai Bench, comprising Mr. Kuldip Kumar Kareer (Judicial Member) and Mr. Anil Raj Chellan (Technical Member) has held that Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) can be initiated against a Corporate Debtor under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code”) even if the Corporate Debtor had been acting as an agent of an ultimate client or principal.

NCLT Mumbai: Operational Debt Under IBC Does Not Include Penalty Or Liquidated Damages

Case Title: Sucden India Private Limited vs. Matoshri Laxmi Sugar Co-generation Industries Limited

Case No.: CP (IB) No.219/MB/2022

The National Company Law Tribunal ('NCLT') Mumbai, comprising Shri K.R. Saji Kumar (Judicial Member) and Shri Sanjiv Dutt (Technical Member) held that the operational debt under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ('IBC') does not include penalty or liquidated damages.

NCLT Notifies Advocates, Litigants, Interns And Advocate Clerks/Court Clerks Not To Be Entertained For Administrative Or Registry Work Beyond 05 PM

File No.: 25/02/2024-NCLT

The Registrar of the National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”) has issued an administrative order dated 08.05.2024, intimating that in NCLT Benches, advocates, litigants, interns and advocate clerks/court clerks will not be entertained for any administrative or registry work beyond 05:00 PM.

IBBI

IBBI Proposes Changes To Process Of Issuance Of Record Of Default By Information Utility, Invites Comments Till 31.05.2024

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (“IBBI”) on 10.05.2024 has published a Discussion Paper on “Strengthening the process of issuance of record of default by Information Utility”. It has also invited comments from public/stakeholders regarding proposed changes to the framework pertaining to the process of issuance of record of default by Information Utility”. The comments can be submitted online at www.ibbi.gov.in till 31.05.2024. The Discussion Paper primarily proposes changes to Strengthen the Process Of Issuance Of Record Of Default (Rod).