Homebuyers Who Secure RERA Decrees Can't Be Treated Differently From Other Financial Creditors Under IBC: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices S Ravindra Bhat and Aravind Kumar, has held that homebuyers cannot be treated differently from other "financial creditors" under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) 2016 just because they have secured orders from the authority under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016.

The bench set aside an order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal which held that beneficiary of orders of the RERA Authority should be treated differently from other home buyer allottees. Home buyers who did not approach authorities under RER Act were given the benefit of 50% better terms than that given to those who approached RERA or who were decree holders.

NCLAT

NCLAT New Delhi: Approval By CCI Prior To Approval Of Resolution Plan By CoC Is Directory In Nature

Case Title: Soneko Marketing Pvt. Ltd. vs. Girish Sriram Juneja & Ors.

Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 807 of 2023

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (‘NCLAT’), New Delhi Bench, comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member), has held that Section 31(4) of IBC has to be read to mean that though the approval by the Competition Commission of India (“CCI”) is ‘mandatory’, the approval by the CCI prior to the approval of the CoC is ‘directory’.

The Tribunal observed that as per the timelines of the Competition Act and that of CIRP, Resolution Plan submission, and CoC approval in the Code, it is not in the hands of the Resolution Plan when CCI will grant the approval. The CCI has to act as per statutory provisions of the Competition Act and it has been given 210 days to take a decision. It pointed out that if it holds that prior approval of the CCI is mandatory prior to the approval of the Plan by the CoC, it will lead to incongruous results, the CIRP cannot be frozen or cannot be put on halt because an application is submitted before the CCI leading to an adverse effect on the CIRP.

NCLAT New Delhi: Date Of Default As Per One Time Restructure Agreement Shall Be Date Of Default

Case Title: Pradeep Madhukar More vs. Central Bank of India

Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.837 of 2023

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), Principal Bench, comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Barun Mitra (Technical Member), has held that if the Bank has entered into One Time Restructuring (‘OTR’) Agreement with the Corporate Debtor, the date of default for the purpose of Section 10A of IBC will be the date of default in the OTR proposal and not the original/Non-Performing Asset (‘NPA’) date of default.

NCLAT New Delhi: Disputes Surrounding Claims And Counter-Claims Cannot Be Adjudicated Or Determined By The Adjudicating Authority Given Their Summary Jurisdiction

Case Title: Rakesh Kumar (Suspended Director of Suchi Paper Mills Ltd.) vs. Flourish Paper & Chemicals Ltd.

Case No.: Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No. 1161 of 2022

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), New Delhi Bench comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Barun Mitra (Technical Member), has held that disputes surrounding claims and counter-claims cannot be adjudicated or determined by the Adjudicating Authority given their summary jurisdiction.

NCLAT New Delhi: No Fresh Period Of Limitation From The Date Of MSME Order When Application Barred By Time

Case Title: Pan Pacific Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. Ayyappa Hydro Power Ltd.

Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1239 of 2023

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), Principal Bench, New Delhi comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member), and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member), has held that no fresh period of Limitation would commence from the date of an order passed by MSME department order, when an application under IBC seeking initiation of CIRP is barred by time.

NCLAT Chennai: FC And OC Can’t Give Additional Facts Not Provided In Application Under Sections 7, 9 Or 10 Of IBC

Case Title: State Bank of India vs. India Power Corporation Limited

Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No.87/2023

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), Chennai Bench comprising of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member) and Shreesha Merla (Technical Member), has held that a creditor cannot set up a new case or raise additional facts altogether that has not been set up in the main application filed either u/s 7, 9, or 10 of IBC, when NCLT allows the creditor (Petitioner) to file a rejoinder to the reply pertaining to additional facts stated by Corporate Debtor.

Mere Statement Of Operational Creditor That No Dispute Exists, Is Not Enough: NCLAT Delhi

Case title: NTT Data Business Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v Trident Ltd.

Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1228 of 2023

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), New Delhi Bench, comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Shri Barun Mitra (Technical Member), has held that Operational Creditor merely responding to notice invoking arbitration by stating that no disputes exist, would not prevent the NCLT from concluding that disputes exist based on material on record.

NCLAT New Delhi: No Point In Discussing An Issue, Even If Issue Is Attractive, After The Closure Of CIRP Proceedings

Case Title: State Bank of India vs. Ritesh Prakash Adatiya & Ors.

Case No.: Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 505 of 2023

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), Principal Bench, New Delhi comprising of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member) and Naresh Salecha (Technical Member), has held that when the CIRP proceedings are ultimately closed and no such proceedings exist, there is no point in discussing the issue even if the issue may be attractive.

NCLT

NCLT Kolkata: Provisions Of IBC Shall Override The Section 29 Of State Financial Corporation Act, 1951

Case Title: Pankaj Tibrewal vs. West Bengal Industrial Development Corporation

Case No.: C.P (IB) No.1712/KB/201

The National Company Law Tribunal (‘NCLT’), Kolkata Bench comprising of Mrs. Bidisha Banerjee (Judicial Member) and Mr. Balraj Joshi (Technical Member), has held that the provisions of IBC prevail over the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 (‘SFC Act, 1951’).

It was observed that IBC is a Special Statute as also a later statute vis-a-vis the SFC Act, 1951, both having non-obstante clauses. The reach of the non-obstante clause of the SFC Act, 1951 is limited by Section 46B of the Act, whereas non-obstante clause of IBC shows that it prevails in all situations. The Bench concluded that IBC as a special statute has a non-obstante clause which does not have a limited reach, unlike the SFC Act, 1951.

NCLT Mumbai: Penalty Imposed By SEBI During Liquidation Can Be Claimed Before Liquidator And Considered U/S 53 Of IBC

Case Title: Securities Board of India vs. Mr. Vishal Ghisulal Jain

Case No.: C.P. No. (IB) N. 402 of 2018

The National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”), Mumbai Bench comprising of Ms. Lakshmi Gurung (Judicial Member) and Shri Charanjeet Singh Gulati (Technical Member), has held that a penalty imposed by SEBI’s Adjudicating Officer on Corporate Debtor during the liquidation can be claimed before the Liquidator and can be considered for the purpose of distribution of assets under Section 53 of IBC.

NCLT Chennai Bench Reconstituted W.E.F. 12th October 2023

File No.: 10/03/2023-NCLT

The National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”) has issued a circular dated 11.10.2023, intimating the reconstitution of NCLT Chennai Bench with effect from 12.10.2023. Shri Jyoti Kumar Tripathi (Judicial Member) has been newly appointed as a NCLT Member and has been posted to the NCLT Chennai Bench.

The reconstituted bench is as under:

NCLT Chennai Bench (Court No. 1)

1. Shri Sanjiv Jain (Judicial Member)
2. Shri Venkataraman Subramaniam (Technical Member)

NCLT Chennai Bench (Court No. 2)

1. Shri Jyoti Kumar Tripathi (Judicial Member)
2. Shri Ravichandran Ramasamy (Technical Member)