Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 31

Supreme Court settles the enforceability of arbitral awards post-resolution plan approval under IBC: Electrosteel Steel Limited vs. Ispat Carrier Private Limited (2025) INSC 525 (21 April 2025)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 36, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 31, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 7, Judges, Ujjal Bhuyan

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 21 April 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 525 Judges: Abhay S. Oka, J., Ujjal Bhuyan, J. The Supreme Court addressed a critical question regarding the enforceability of arbitral awards when a resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) has been approved. This case, Electrosteel Steel Limited (Now M/S […]

Supreme Court settles the enforceability of arbitral awards post-resolution plan approval under IBC: Electrosteel Steel Limited vs. Ispat Carrier Private Limited (2025) INSC 525 (21 April 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court overturns NCLT order on revaluation of assets in insolvency case: Ramkrishna Forgings Limited vs. Ravindra Loonkar (2023)

/ Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 79, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 30, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 31

Supreme Court overturns NCLT order on revaluation of assets in insolvency case: Ramkrishna Forgings Limited vs. Ravindra Loonkar (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) can order a revaluation of a corporate debtor’s assets after the Committee of Creditors (CoC) has approved a resolution plan. CASE TYPE: Insolvency and Bankruptcy Law Case

Supreme Court overturns NCLT order on revaluation of assets in insolvency case: Ramkrishna Forgings Limited vs. Ravindra Loonkar (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Belated Claim in Insolvency: RPS Infrastructure Ltd. vs. Mukul Kumar (2023)

/ Arbitral Award, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 31, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 60(5)

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Belated Claim in Insolvency: RPS Infrastructure Ltd. vs. Mukul Kumar (2023) Date of the Judgment: September 11, 2023 Citation: 2023 INSC 816 Judges: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J. and Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Can a creditor, who missed the initial deadline, have their claim considered after the resolution plan has been approved

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Belated Claim in Insolvency: RPS Infrastructure Ltd. vs. Mukul Kumar (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles liability of Directors under Section 138 NI Act post IBC Resolution: Ajay Kumar Goenka vs. Tourism Finance Corporation of India Ltd. (2023)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 14, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 31, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 32A, J.B. Pardiwala, Judges, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 141, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 142, Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court Clarifies Liability Under Section 138 NI Act Post IBC Resolution Date of the Judgment: March 15, 2023 Citation: (2023) INSC 218 Judges: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J. and Abhay S. Oka, J. (Majority Opinion by Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J., Concurring Opinion by J.B. Pardiwala, J.) Can a director of a company be held liable

Supreme Court settles liability of Directors under Section 138 NI Act post IBC Resolution: Ajay Kumar Goenka vs. Tourism Finance Corporation of India Ltd. (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies withdrawal of resolution plan under IBC: Ebix vs. Committee of Creditors (2021)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 30, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 31, Judges, M. R. Shah

Date of the Judgment: 13 September 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 609 Judges: Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J and M. R. Shah, J Can a successful resolution applicant withdraw their resolution plan after it has been approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) but before final approval by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT)? The Supreme

Supreme Court clarifies withdrawal of resolution plan under IBC: Ebix vs. Committee of Creditors (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Notification on Personal Guarantors under IBC: Lalit Kumar Jain vs. Union of India (2021)

/ Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 128, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 1(3), Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 31, Insolvency Resolution, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, S. Ravindra Bhat

Supreme Court Upholds Notification on Personal Guarantors under IBC LEGAL ISSUE: Validity of a notification extending the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 to personal guarantors of corporate debtors. CASE TYPE: Insolvency Law Case Name: Lalit Kumar Jain vs. Union of India & Ors. [Judgment Date]: 21 May 2021 Introduction Date of the Judgment: May 21,

Supreme Court Upholds Notification on Personal Guarantors under IBC: Lalit Kumar Jain vs. Union of India (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the binding nature of Resolution Plans on Government bodies in Insolvency Cases (13 April 2021)

/ B.R. Gavai, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 32, Hrishikesh Roy, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 238, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 31, Judges, R.F. Nariman, Resolution Plan

Supreme Court Clarifies Binding Nature of Resolution Plans on Government Bodies Date of the Judgment: 13 April 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 210 Judges: B.R. Gavai, J., R.F. Nariman, J., Hrishikesh Roy, J. Can a resolution plan approved under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (I&B Code) bind government bodies, including tax authorities? The Supreme Court

Supreme Court settles the binding nature of Resolution Plans on Government bodies in Insolvency Cases (13 April 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Powers of Adjudicating Authority in Jaypee Infratech Resolution Plan (24 March 2021)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Dinesh Maheshwari, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 30, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 31, Judges, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court Clarifies Powers of Adjudicating Authority in Jaypee Infratech Resolution Plan (24 March 2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Scope of powers and jurisdiction of the Adjudicating Authority while dealing with the resolution plan approved by the Committee of Creditors. CASE TYPE: Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) Case Name: Jaypee Kensington Boulevard Apartments Welfare Association & Ors.

Supreme Court Clarifies Powers of Adjudicating Authority in Jaypee Infratech Resolution Plan (24 March 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of contempt in resolution plan disputes: Committee of Creditors of A MTEK Auto Limited vs. Dinkar T Venkatasubramanian & Ors (2021)

/ Contempt Law, Contempt of Court, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 31, Judges, M R Shah

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of contempt in resolution plan disputes: Committee of Creditors of A MTEK Auto Limited vs. Dinkar T Venkatasubramanian & Ors (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a party’s conduct in a corporate insolvency resolution process, specifically attempting to withdraw from an approved resolution plan and raising a plea of force majeure, constitutes

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of contempt in resolution plan disputes: Committee of Creditors of A MTEK Auto Limited vs. Dinkar T Venkatasubramanian & Ors (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds 75% Voting Share for Resolution Plans under IBC: K. Sashidhar vs. Indian Overseas Bank (2019)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Ajay Rastogi, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 30(4), Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 31, Judges

Supreme Court Upholds 75% Voting Share for Resolution Plans under IBC: K. Sashidhar vs. Indian Overseas Bank (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) requires approval by at least 75% of the voting share of financial creditors. CASE TYPE: Insolvency Law Case Name: K. Sashidhar vs. Indian

Supreme Court Upholds 75% Voting Share for Resolution Plans under IBC: K. Sashidhar vs. Indian Overseas Bank (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights of Suspended Directors in Insolvency Proceedings: Vijay Kumar Jain vs. Standard Chartered Bank (2019)

/ Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 24, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 31, Judges, Navin Sinha, R.F. Nariman

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights of Suspended Directors in Insolvency Proceedings: Vijay Kumar Jain vs. Standard Chartered Bank (2019) Date of the Judgment: 31 January 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 78 Judges: R.F. Nariman, J., Navin Sinha, J. Can former directors of a company undergoing insolvency proceedings access crucial resolution plans? The Supreme Court of India recently

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights of Suspended Directors in Insolvency Proceedings: Vijay Kumar Jain vs. Standard Chartered Bank (2019) Read Post »

Scroll to Top