Weekly Digest Of IBC Cases: 27th May 2024 To 02nd June 2024

NCLAT Upholds Adani Goodhomes Bid With 93% Haircut For Radius Estate

Case Title: Beacon Trusteeship Ltd vs. Jayesh Sanghrajka & Ors and connected petitions

Case No: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1494 – 1495 of 2022

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT'), New Delhi comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Barun Mitra (Technical Member) upholds the Resolution Plan submitted by Adani Goodhomes for the real estate company Radius Estate as part of its Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process ('CIRP').

Compulsory Convertible Debentures Having No Obligation Of Repayment To Be Treated As Financial Debt: NCLAT Chennai

Case Title: Shubham Corporation Private Limited vs Kotoju Vasudeva Rao

Case No. Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 163 of 2023

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Chennai Bench, comprising Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member) and Shri Ajai Das Mehrotra (Technical Member), while adjudicating an application under Section 9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC, 2016”) held that the Compulsory Convertible Debentures having no obligation of repayment should be treated as Financial Debt under IBC.

NCLAT Upholds Suraksha Realty's Resolution Plan For Jaypee Infratech, Directs Additional ₹1,334 Crore Payment To YEIDA

Case Title: Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority vs. Monitoring Committee of Jaypee Infratech Ltd. Through Anuj Jain, Secretary & Ors.

Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.493 of 2023 & I.A. No. 3017, 3703 of 2023 & 2535, 2548, 2660, 2669 of 2024

The National Company Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT) Delhi bench, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Barun Mitra (Technical Member) held that Suraksha Realty must pay ₹1,334.31 crore to YEIDA over the next four years. This payment is intended to enable YEIDA to increase land compensation for farmers. This is the obligation which stems from a concession agreement between Jaypee and YEIDA.

NCLAT Delhi: Refund Of Security Deposit Contingent Upon Executing A Leave And License Agreement Doesn't Constitute An Operational Debt Under IBC

Case Title: Carestream Health India Private Limited vs. Seaview Mercantile LLP

Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 579 of 2023

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Delhi, comprising Mr. Justice Yogesh Khanna (Judicial Member) and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) held that the claim for refund of a Security Deposit linked to a contractual obligation contingent upon executing a leave and license agreement does not constitute an Operational Debt under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ('IBC').

NCLAT Delhi: NCLT Rule 49 Gives Ample Authority To Adjudicating Authority To Proceed “Ex Parte” As “Appearance” Refers To Appearance By CD Or By Authorised Representative

Case Title: Ashok Tiwari vs. DBS Bank India (Ltd.) and Anr.

Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 195 of 2024

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 Rule 49 of NCLT Rules, 2016 gives ample jurisdiction to the Adjudicating Authority to proceed for ex parte as the corporate debtor does not appear. “Appearance” as contemplated under Rule 49(1) is an appearance by the corporate debtor or by an authorized representative.

Once Statutory Requirements Of Amalgamation Scheme Are Met, NCLT Has Supervisory Role, Can't Change Appointment Date: NCLAT

Case Title: Marathon Nextgen Townships Pvt Ltd and Anr vs Regional Director, Western Region, Ministry of Corporate Affairs

Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) No.190 of 2023

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') Principal Bench of Justice Yogesh Khanna (Judicial Member), and Ajai Das Mehrotra (Technical Member) held the appointed date in a scheme of arrangement cannot be changed by the NCLT. The bench held that once the statutory requirements have been met, and there are no violations of the law or any aspects of the proposed scheme that are inherently objectionable or against public policy, then the jurisdiction of the NCLT is limited to a supervisory role.

NCLAT Issues Notice For Sittings Of NCLAT Principal Bench, New Delhi During Of Annual Summer Vacation

File No. 10/36/2018-NCLAT

The Registrar of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”) has issued a notice dated 27.05.2024, intimating that NCLAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi, the Registry shall function during the period of Annual Summer Vacation from 03.06.2024 to 30.06.2024.

Settlement Agreement During Pendency Of Section 7 Petition Does Not Bar From Filing Second Section 7 Petition: NCLAT Delhi

Case Title: Desh Bhushan Jain, Erstwhile Director of Angel Promoters Pvt. Ltd. vs Abhay Kumar, IRP of Angel Promoters Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.124 of 2024

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT'), Delhi Bench, comprising Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member), Shri Naresh Salecha (Technical Member), and Shri Indevar Pandey (Technical Member) held that a second petition under Section 7 is maintainable if the Corporate Debtor defaulted in the settlement agreement arrived during the pendency of Section 7 petition.

NCLAT Delhi: Set-Off With Refund Of Claim Between Expiry Of CIRP And Before Passing Liquidation Order Amounts To Violation Of Moratorium Under IBC

Case Title: Mr. Devarajan Raman Liquidator of Kotak Urja Pvt. Ltd. vs. Principal Commissioner Income Tax and Ors.

Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 977 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 the set-off/adjustment of demand with refund by Income Tax Department during the intervening period when the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process ('CIRP') timeline period has expired but before passing of Liquidation Order under Section 33 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ('IBC') amounts to violation of moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC.

NCLT

NCLT Replaces Resolution Professional In Subhash Chandra's Personal Insolvency Case

Case Title: Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd. vs Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd.

Case No.: (IB)-97/ND/2022 IA-2724/2024, IA-2148/2024

The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Kumar Bhardwaj (Judicial Member) and Subrata Kumar Dash (Technical Member) has replaced Raj Kamal Saraogi as the Resolution Professional (RP) in the insolvency proceedings involving Subhash Chandra, the Chairman Emeritus of Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited (ZEEL).

NCLT Kolkata: Limitation Period To Enforce Scheme Under Companies Act Is 12 Years Given In Article 136 Of Limitation Act

Case Title: Machino Transport Private Limited vs. Machino Finance Private Limited

Case No.: IA (CA) No. 213/KB/2023 and CP No. 42/KB/2021

The National Company Law Tribunal ('NCLT') Kolkata, comprising Shri Rohit Kapoor (Judicial Member) and Shri Balraj Joshi (Technical Member) held that the limitation period for enforcing a scheme under the Companies Act, 2013 is 12 years as prescribed under the Article 136 of the Limitation Act, 1963.