Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 60(5)(c)

Supreme Court Upholds Resolution Plan, Limits High Court Interference in Insolvency Cases (2025)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 12(A), Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 60(5)(c)

Supreme Court Upholds Resolution Plan, Limits High Court Interference in Insolvency Cases (2025) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court can interfere with Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under Article 226 of the Constitution. CASE TYPE: Insolvency Law Case Name: Mohammed Enterprises (Tanzania) Ltd. vs. Farooq Ali Khan & Ors. Judgment Date: January 03, 2025 Date […]

Supreme Court Upholds Resolution Plan, Limits High Court Interference in Insolvency Cases (2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the process for payment of Resolution Professional Fees in cases where CIRP is set aside: Devarajan Raman vs. Bank of India Limited (2022) INSC 1

/ A.S. Bopanna, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 60(5)(c), Judges, Resolution Professional Fees

Supreme Court clarifies the process for payment of Resolution Professional Fees in cases where CIRP is set aside: Devarajan Raman vs. Bank of India Limited (2022) INSC 1 Date of the Judgment: January 5, 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 1 Judges: Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J and A.S. Bopanna, J. Can a Resolution Professional (RP) be

Supreme Court clarifies the process for payment of Resolution Professional Fees in cases where CIRP is set aside: Devarajan Raman vs. Bank of India Limited (2022) INSC 1 Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the process for payment of Resolution Professional fees in Corporate Insolvency Cases: Devarajan Raman vs. Bank of India Limited (2022) INSC 142 (05 January 2022)

/ A S Bopanna, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 60(5)(c), Judges, Resolution Professional Fees

Supreme Court clarifies the process for payment of Resolution Professional fees in Corporate Insolvency Cases: Devarajan Raman vs. Bank of India Limited (2022) INSC 142 (05 January 2022) LEGAL ISSUE: The core legal issue revolves around the proper procedure for determining and disbursing the fees and costs of a Resolution Professional (RP) in a Corporate

Supreme Court clarifies the process for payment of Resolution Professional fees in Corporate Insolvency Cases: Devarajan Raman vs. Bank of India Limited (2022) INSC 142 (05 January 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the process for determining Resolution Professional fees in Corporate Insolvency: Devarajan Raman vs. Bank of India Limited (05 January 2022)

/ A S Bopanna, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 60(5)(c), Insolvency Resolution Process Cost, Judges

Supreme Court Clarifies Resolution Professional Fee Determination in Insolvency Cases Date of the Judgment: 05 January 2022 Citation: Civil Appeal No 3160 of 2020 Judges: Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J and A S Bopanna, J. Can an adjudicating authority arbitrarily reduce the fees of a Resolution Professional (RP) without proper justification? The Supreme Court of

Supreme Court clarifies the process for determining Resolution Professional fees in Corporate Insolvency: Devarajan Raman vs. Bank of India Limited (05 January 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies NCLT’s Jurisdiction in Contract Termination During CIRP: Tata Consultancy Services vs. SK Wheels (2021)

/ A S Bopanna, Breach of contract, Contract Law, Contract Law with Determinable Contract, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 238, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 60(5)(c), Judges, Specific Relief Act, 1963, Specific Relief Act, 1963 with Section 14

Supreme Court Clarifies NCLT’s Jurisdiction in Contract Termination During CIRP: Tata Consultancy Services vs. SK Wheels (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Scope of the National Company Law Tribunal’s (NCLT) residuary jurisdiction under Section 60(5)(c) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) to adjudicate contractual disputes during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). CASE TYPE: Insolvency Law, Contract

Supreme Court Clarifies NCLT’s Jurisdiction in Contract Termination During CIRP: Tata Consultancy Services vs. SK Wheels (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies jurisdiction of NCLT in determining fees of registered valuers post CIRP set aside: Alok Kaushik vs. Mrs Bhuvaneshwari Ramanathan and Others (2021) INSC 143 (15 March 2021)

/ Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 5(13), Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 60(5)(c), Insolvency Resolution Process Costs, Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction of NCLT in Determining Fees of Registered Valuers Post CIRP Set Aside Date of the Judgment: 15 March 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 143 Judges: Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J and M.R. Shah, J. Can a registered valuer, appointed during a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), claim their fees if the CIRP

Supreme Court clarifies jurisdiction of NCLT in determining fees of registered valuers post CIRP set aside: Alok Kaushik vs. Mrs Bhuvaneshwari Ramanathan and Others (2021) INSC 143 (15 March 2021) Read Post »

Scroll to Top