Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights of Secured Creditors with Pledged Shares in Insolvency Cases: Vistra ITCL vs. Dinkar Venkatasubramanian (2023)

/ Financial Creditor, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 172, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 52, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 53, Judges, M. R. Shah, Pledge, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights of Secured Creditors with Pledged Shares in Insolvency Cases LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a secured creditor holding pledged shares of a corporate debtor can be considered a financial creditor or operational creditor under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), and how their interests should be protected in a resolution plan. CASE […]

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights of Secured Creditors with Pledged Shares in Insolvency Cases: Vistra ITCL vs. Dinkar Venkatasubramanian (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Resolution Plan Due to Ineligibility and Procedural Lapses: M.K. Rajagopalan vs. Dr. Periasamy Palani Gounder (2023)

/ Companies Act, 2013, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 164, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 166, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Dinesh Maheshwari, Indian Trusts Act, 1882, Indian Trusts Act, 1882 with Section 88, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 29A, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 30, Judges, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Resolution Plan Due to Ineligibility and Procedural Lapses: M.K. Rajagopalan vs. Dr. Periasamy Palani Gounder (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a resolution plan can be approved despite the resolution applicant’s ineligibility and procedural irregularities in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). CASE TYPE: Insolvency Law Case Name: M.K. Rajagopalan vs. Dr.

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Resolution Plan Due to Ineligibility and Procedural Lapses: M.K. Rajagopalan vs. Dr. Periasamy Palani Gounder (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Valuation and Eligibility in Corporate Insolvency: M.K. Rajagopalan vs. Dr. Periasamy Palani Gounder (2023)

/ Companies Act, 2013, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 164, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 166, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Dinesh Maheshwari, Indian Trusts Act, 1882, Indian Trusts Act, 1882 with Section 88, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 29A, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 30, Judges, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Clarifies Valuation and Eligibility in Corporate Insolvency: M.K. Rajagopalan vs. Dr. Periasamy Palani Gounder (2023) Date of the Judgment: 03 May 2023 Citation: 2023 INSC 486 Judges: Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, Justice Vikram Nath. Can a resolution applicant be disqualified for a conflict of interest arising from their role in a charitable trust? The

Supreme Court Clarifies Valuation and Eligibility in Corporate Insolvency: M.K. Rajagopalan vs. Dr. Periasamy Palani Gounder (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds IBC Section 53: Workmen Dues Prioritized in Liquidation (2 May 2023)

/ Companies Act, 2013, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 327, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 53, Judges, Liquidation Process, M.R. Shah, Sanjiv Khanna, Winding Up Provisions

Supreme Court Upholds IBC Section 53: Workmen Dues Prioritized in Liquidation LEGAL ISSUE: Validity of Section 327(7) of the Companies Act, 2013 and the waterfall mechanism under Section 53 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 concerning workmen’s dues. CASE TYPE: Insolvency and Bankruptcy Law Case Name: Moser Baer Karamchari Union Thr. President Mahesh Chand

Supreme Court Upholds IBC Section 53: Workmen Dues Prioritized in Liquidation (2 May 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies limitation for appeals under IBC: Sanket Kumar Agarwal vs. APG Logistics (2023)

/ Appeals, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 61, J B Pardiwala, Judges, Limitation Act 1963, Limitation Act 1963 with Section 12, National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules, 2016, National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules, 2016 with Rule 22, National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules, 2016 with Rule 3

Supreme Court clarifies limitation for appeals under IBC: Sanket Kumar Agarwal vs. APG Logistics (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Determining the correct calculation of the limitation period for filing appeals under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). CASE TYPE: Insolvency Law Case Name: Sanket Kumar Agarwal & Anr vs. APG Logistics Private Limited [Judgment Date]: 1

Supreme Court clarifies limitation for appeals under IBC: Sanket Kumar Agarwal vs. APG Logistics (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Limitation for IBC Appeals: Sanket Kumar Agarwal vs. APG Logistics (2023)

/ Appeals under IBC, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Exclusion of Time in Legal Proceedings, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 238A, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 61, J B Pardiwala, Judges, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Section 12

Supreme Court Clarifies Limitation for IBC Appeals: Sanket Kumar Agarwal vs. APG Logistics (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Calculation of limitation period for appeals under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. CASE TYPE: Insolvency Law Case Name: Sanket Kumar Agarwal & Anr vs. APG Logistics Private Limited [Judgment Date]: May 1, 2023 Introduction Date of the Judgment:

Supreme Court Clarifies Limitation for IBC Appeals: Sanket Kumar Agarwal vs. APG Logistics (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Withdrawal of CIRP Before CoC Formation: Abhishek Singh vs. Huhtamaki PPL Ltd. (28 March 2023)

/ B.R. Gavai, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 12A, Judges, National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016, National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 with Rule 11, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Allows Withdrawal of CIRP Before CoC Formation: Abhishek Singh vs. Huhtamaki PPL Ltd. (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) can be withdrawn before the constitution of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) when a settlement has been reached between the Operational Creditor (OC) and the Corporate Debtor (CD). CASE TYPE:

Supreme Court Allows Withdrawal of CIRP Before CoC Formation: Abhishek Singh vs. Huhtamaki PPL Ltd. (28 March 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Withdrawal of CIRP Before CoC Formation: Abhishek Singh vs. Huhtamaki PPL Ltd. (28 March 2023)

/ B.R. Gavai, Committee of Creditors (CoC), Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 12A, Judges, National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016, National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 with Rule 11, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Allows Withdrawal of CIRP Before CoC Formation: Abhishek Singh vs. Huhtamaki PPL Ltd. (2023) Date of the Judgment: 28 March 2023 Citation: 2023 INSC 308 Judges: B.R. Gavai, J., Vikram Nath, J. Can a company undergoing the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) withdraw the process if it settles with the operational creditor before

Supreme Court Allows Withdrawal of CIRP Before CoC Formation: Abhishek Singh vs. Huhtamaki PPL Ltd. (28 March 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 »

Liability of Directors under Section 138 NI Act: Supreme Court Judgment on IBC Resolution Plans (March 15, 2023)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Dishonor of Cheque, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 14, 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, Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court Clarifies Liability of Directors in Cheque Dishonor Cases Post IBC Resolution Date of the Judgment: March 15, 2023 Citation: 2023 INSC 232 Judges: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J. and Abhay S. Oka, J. (authored by Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.) and J.B. Pardiwala, J. (Concurring Opinion) Can a director of a company be held liable

Liability of Directors under Section 138 NI Act: Supreme Court Judgment on IBC Resolution Plans (March 15, 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Inclusion of Development Rights as Corporate Assets in Insolvency: Victory Iron Works Ltd. vs. Jitendra Lohia (2023)

/ Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 202, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 18, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 3(27), Insolvency Resolution Process, Judges, Pankaj Mithal, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Upholds Inclusion of Development Rights as Corporate Assets in Insolvency: Victory Iron Works Ltd. vs. Jitendra Lohia (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether development rights of a corporate debtor over a property can be considered as an asset during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). CASE TYPE: Insolvency Law Case Name: Victory Iron Works Ltd.

Supreme Court Upholds Inclusion of Development Rights as Corporate Assets in Insolvency: Victory Iron Works Ltd. vs. Jitendra Lohia (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Inclusion of Development Rights as Corporate Debtor’s Asset in Insolvency: Victory Iron Works Ltd. vs. Jitendra Lohia (2023)

/ Contract Law, Development Agreement, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 18, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 25, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 3(27), Judges, Leave and License Agreement, Pankaj Mithal, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Upholds Inclusion of Development Rights as Corporate Debtor’s Asset in Insolvency: Victory Iron Works Ltd. vs. Jitendra Lohia (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether development rights of a Corporate Debtor over a property can be considered as its asset for the purpose of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. CASE TYPE: Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process

Supreme Court Upholds Inclusion of Development Rights as Corporate Debtor’s Asset in Insolvency: Victory Iron Works Ltd. vs. Jitendra Lohia (2023) Read Post »

Scroll to Top