Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies Act in Recovery Suits: Fertilizer Corporation of India vs. Coromandal Sacks (2024)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 39, Interest on Delayed Payments, Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993, Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993 with Section 4, Revival of Sick Industries, Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 with Section 22(1)

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies Act in Recovery Suits: Fertilizer Corporation of India vs. Coromandal Sacks (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Scope of Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 regarding the suspension of legal proceedings in recovery suits against sick industrial companies. CASE TYPE: Civil […]

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies Act in Recovery Suits: Fertilizer Corporation of India vs. Coromandal Sacks (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Re-Auction of Sick Company Assets: Rajiv Kumar Jindal vs. BCI Staff Colony (2023)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Asset Sale, Bela M. Trivedi, Company Law, Judges, Official Liquidator, Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 with Section 18(2)(k), Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 with Section 20(4), Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 with Section 21(c)

Supreme Court Upholds Re-Auction of Sick Company Assets: Rajiv Kumar Jindal vs. BCI Staff Colony (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the auction of assets of a sick company was valid when the Operating Agency failed to follow mandatory procedures. CASE TYPE: Insolvency/Company Law. Case Name: Rajiv Kumar Jindal and Others vs. BCI Staff Colony Residential Welfare

Supreme Court Upholds Re-Auction of Sick Company Assets: Rajiv Kumar Jindal vs. BCI Staff Colony (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles rights of unsecured creditors in SICA rehabilitation schemes: Modi Rubber Ltd. vs. Continental Carbon India Ltd. (2023)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 300A, Judges, M.R. Shah, Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 with Section 18, Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 with Section 19, Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 with Section 32, Sudhanshu Dhulia

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights of Unsecured Creditors Under SICA: Modi Rubber Ltd. vs. Continental Carbon India Ltd. (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an unsecured creditor can opt out of a rehabilitation scheme approved under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (SICA) and recover their full dues later. CASE TYPE: Insolvency Law Case Name: Modi

Supreme Court settles rights of unsecured creditors in SICA rehabilitation schemes: Modi Rubber Ltd. vs. Continental Carbon India Ltd. (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the time limit for rectifying defects in insolvency applications: M/S. Surendra Trading Company vs. M/S. Juggilal Kamlapat Jute Mills Company Limited and Others (2017) INSC 758 (19 September 2017)

/ A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 252, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 9, Insolvency Resolution Process, Judges, SICA Proceedings, Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985

Can an application for corporate insolvency be rejected if defects are not rectified within seven days? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question, clarifying the nature of the seven-day time limit for rectifying defects in applications filed by operational creditors under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. This judgment has significant implications for the

Supreme Court clarifies the time limit for rectifying defects in insolvency applications: M/S. Surendra Trading Company vs. M/S. Juggilal Kamlapat Jute Mills Company Limited and Others (2017) INSC 758 (19 September 2017) Read Post »

Scroll to Top