Companies Act, 2013

Supreme Court Orders Protection of Great Indian Bustard and Lesser Florican: M.K. Ranjitsinh & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. (2021) INSC 217 (19 April 2021)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Companies Act, 2013, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 135, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 166(2), Compensatory Afforestation Fund Act, 2016, Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 with Section 2(a), Environmental Law, Judges, Public Trust Doctrine, S. A. Bobde, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Orders Protection of Great Indian Bustard and Lesser Florican Date of the Judgment: 19 April 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 217 Judges: S. A. Bobde (Chief Justice of India), A.S. Bopanna J., and V. Ramasubramanian J. Can India’s endangered bird species be saved from extinction? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question […]

Supreme Court Orders Protection of Great Indian Bustard and Lesser Florican: M.K. Ranjitsinh & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. (2021) INSC 217 (19 April 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the role of balance sheets in acknowledging debt under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC): Asset Reconstruction Company vs. Bishal Jaiswal (2021)

/ B.R. Gavai, Companies Act, 2013, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 129, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Financial Statements, Hrishikesh Roy, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 238A, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 7, Judges, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Section 18, R.F. Nariman

Supreme Court Clarifies the Role of Balance Sheets in Acknowledging Debt under IBC Date of the Judgment: April 15, 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 218 Judges: R.F. Nariman, J., B.R. Gavai, J., Hrishikesh Roy, J. Can a company’s balance sheet serve as valid proof of debt acknowledgment, thereby extending the limitation period for initiating insolvency proceedings?

Supreme Court clarifies the role of balance sheets in acknowledging debt under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC): Asset Reconstruction Company vs. Bishal Jaiswal (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Tata Sons’ Actions, Rejects Oppression Claims in Cyrus Mistry Case (26 March 2021)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Articles of Association, Companies Act, 2013, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 14, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 241, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 242, Corporate Governance, Corporate Law, Judges, Oppression and Mismanagement, S.A. Bobde, V. Ramasubramanian

Date of the Judgment: 26 March 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 187 Judges: S.A. Bobde (Chief Justice of India), A.S. Bopanna J., V. Ramasubramanian J. Can a company’s board remove its chairman for loss of confidence? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question in a high-profile dispute involving Tata Sons and Cyrus Mistry. This

Supreme Court Upholds Tata Sons’ Actions, Rejects Oppression Claims in Cyrus Mistry Case (26 March 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Refuses to Stay Electoral Bond Scheme: Association for Democratic Reforms vs. Union of India (26 March 2021)

/ A. S. Bopanna, Companies Act, 2013, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 128, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 129, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 182, Constitutional Law, Electoral Bond Scheme, Judges, Representation of the People Act, 1951, Representation of the People Act, 1951 with Section 29C, Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 with Section 31, S. A. Bobde, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Refuses to Stay Electoral Bond Scheme: Association for Democratic Reforms vs. Union of India (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Electoral Bond Scheme, 2018 should be stayed. CASE TYPE: Public Interest Litigation, Constitutional Law Case Name: Association for Democratic Reforms & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors. [Judgment Date]: 26 March 2021 Date

Supreme Court Refuses to Stay Electoral Bond Scheme: Association for Democratic Reforms vs. Union of India (26 March 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Ineligibility Under Section 29A of IBC Extends to Section 230 of Companies Act in Liquidation: Arun Kumar Jagatramka vs. Jindal Steel and Power Ltd. (2021) INSC 158

/ Companies Act, 2013, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 230, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 19, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 29A, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 35(1)(f), Judges, M R Shah, Resolution Process

Supreme Court Clarifies Ineligibility Under Section 29A of IBC Extends to Section 230 of Companies Act in Liquidation: Arun Kumar Jagatramka vs. Jindal Steel and Power Ltd. (2021) INSC 158 Date of the Judgment: 15 March 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 158 Judges: Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J and M R Shah, J Can promoters who

Supreme Court Clarifies Ineligibility Under Section 29A of IBC Extends to Section 230 of Companies Act in Liquidation: Arun Kumar Jagatramka vs. Jindal Steel and Power Ltd. (2021) INSC 158 Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Unitholder Consent for Mutual Fund Winding Up: Franklin Templeton Case (2021)

/ Companies Act, 2013, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 103, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 48, Judges, Mutual Funds, S. Abdul Nazeer, Sanjiv Khanna, SEBI (Mutual Funds) Regulations, 1996, Securities Law, Securities Law with Regulation 18

Supreme Court Clarifies Unitholder Consent for Mutual Fund Winding Up: Franklin Templeton Case (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of regulations regarding unitholder consent for winding up of mutual fund schemes. CASE TYPE: Securities Law, Mutual Funds Case Name: Franklin Templeton Trustee Services Private Limited and Another vs. Amruta Garg and Others etc. [Judgment Date]: 12 February

Supreme Court Clarifies Unitholder Consent for Mutual Fund Winding Up: Franklin Templeton Case (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies transfer of winding-up proceedings to NCLT under IBC: Action Ispat vs. Shyam Metalics (2020)

/ Companies Act, 2013, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 273, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 434, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 238, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Krishna Murari, R.F. Nariman, Winding Up

Supreme Court clarifies transfer of winding-up proceedings to NCLT under IBC: Action Ispat vs. Shyam Metalics (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Transfer of winding-up proceedings to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). CASE TYPE: Insolvency Law Case Name: Action Ispat and Power Pvt. Ltd. vs. Shyam Metalics and Energy

Supreme Court clarifies transfer of winding-up proceedings to NCLT under IBC: Action Ispat vs. Shyam Metalics (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court restricts asset freezing under Section 241 of the Companies Act: Usha Ananthasubramanian vs. Union of India (2020)

/ Companies Act, 2013, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 241, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 337, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 339, Judges, R.F. Nariman, S. Ravindra Bhat, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Restricts Asset Freezing Under Companies Act: Usha Ananthasubramanian vs. Union of India (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) can freeze the assets of a person under Section 241 of the Companies Act, 2013, for alleged mismanagement in a company other than the one they are directly associated with. CASE

Supreme Court restricts asset freezing under Section 241 of the Companies Act: Usha Ananthasubramanian vs. Union of India (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court mandates Provident Fund for Contractual Employees of Pawan Hans: Pawan Hans Ltd. vs. Aviation Karmachari Sanghatana (2020)

/ Companies Act, 2013, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 2(45), Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 with Section 1(3), Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 with Section 16, Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 with Section 2(f), Indu Malhotra, Judges, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court mandates Provident Fund for Contractual Employees of Pawan Hans: Pawan Hans Ltd. vs. Aviation Karmachari Sanghatana (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether contractual employees are entitled to provident fund benefits under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 or the company’s own trust regulations. CASE TYPE: Labour Law Case Name: M/S. PAWAN HANS

Supreme Court mandates Provident Fund for Contractual Employees of Pawan Hans: Pawan Hans Ltd. vs. Aviation Karmachari Sanghatana (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Revised Income Tax Returns Post-Amalgamation: Dalmia Power Ltd. vs. ACIT (2019)

/ Companies Act, 2013, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 230, Company Amalgamation, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 119(2)(b), Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 139(5), Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 170(1), Indu Malhotra, Judges, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Allows Revised Income Tax Returns Post-Amalgamation: Dalmia Power Ltd. vs. ACIT (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether revised income tax returns can be filed after the statutory deadline due to company amalgamation proceedings. CASE TYPE: Income Tax Law Case Name: M/S Dalmia Power Limited & Anr. vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1,

Supreme Court Allows Revised Income Tax Returns Post-Amalgamation: Dalmia Power Ltd. vs. ACIT (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Committee of Creditors’ Commercial Wisdom in Essar Steel Insolvency Resolution (15 November 2019)

/ Companies Act, 2013, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 77, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 29-A, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 7, Insolvency Resolution Process, Judges, R.F. Nariman, Surya Kant, Transfer of Property Act, 1882, Transfer of Property Act, 1882 with Section 48, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Upholds Committee of Creditors’ Commercial Wisdom in Essar Steel Insolvency Resolution Date of the Judgment: 15 November 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 1067 Judges: R.F. Nariman, J., Surya Kant, J., V. Ramasubramanian, J. Can a resolution plan approved by a Committee of Creditors be overturned by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT)? The

Supreme Court Upholds Committee of Creditors’ Commercial Wisdom in Essar Steel Insolvency Resolution (15 November 2019) Read Post »

Scroll to Top