Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
A plain reading of Section 32A IBC reveals that once a resolution plan is approved under Section 31, the Corporate Debtor shall not be prosecuted for an offence committed prior to the commencement of the CIRP. However, this immunity does not extend to the erstwhile officers and persons responsible for the conduct of its business prior to CIRP.
“The IBC is a complete code in itself, having sufficient checks and balances, remedial avenues and appeals. Adherence of protocols and procedures maintains legal discipline and preserves the balance between the need for order and the quest for justice.”
Noting that hypothecation means the process of using an asset as collateral for a loan. It acts as a protection to the lender when the borrower does not repay the loan, the Supreme Court highlighted that the name of the document is not a decisive factor. Only because the title of the document contains the word hypothecation, it cannot be concluded that guarantee is not a part of this document.
The Insolvency Bankruptcy Board of India (‘IBBI’) and INSOL India held the 2nd International Conclave in Delhi on 7th December to engage in the path-breaking discourse surrounding the ever-evolving space of insolvency and bankruptcy.
The claims pertaining to the transfer fees, etc., cannot be dealt with by courts or tribunals as the same relates to the commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors for they are the best persons to determine their interests, and any such interference is non-justiciable except as provided by Section 30(2) of IBC 2016.
The NCLAT held the appellant’s claim was inflated, and the Adjudicating Authority rightly recalculated the actual unpaid amount, which fell below the Rs 1 crore threshold.
‘The autonomy conferred on the parties is not unbridled and appointment of the Arbitrator has to meet the prerequisite of his neutrality and impartiality which are the bedrock on which the foundation of arbitration rests.’
by Anupm Prakash* and Kirti Talreja**
The NCLAT reinforced that not all financial transactions qualify as financial debts under the IBC.
The NCLT noted that Form AA, meant for individual Insolvency Professionals, had been modified by the Insolvency Professional Entity to fit its consent as no separate form for IPEs exists.
The Calcutta High Court said that the principle of comity of nations and comity of courts had been recognized by the Indian Courts by giving adequate weightage to orders or decrees of a foreign court while deciding any proceeding in a domestic court.
The Court held that the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 are penal in nature and not akin to civil recovery proceedings.
The NCLT stated that the petitioner neither had a direct contractual relationship with the respondent, nor was the respondent provided with any goods/services, thereby disqualifying them as an operational creditor.
“Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 states a financial creditor, either by itself or jointly, with other financial creditors, or any other person on behalf of the financial creditor, may file an application for initiating corporate insolvency resolution process against a corporate debtor before the Adjudicating Authority when a default has occurred.”
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 34 and 37 r/w Ss. 2(4) and 16 — Jurisdiction of arbitrator to adjudicate under
The Delhi High Court emphasised that if the relevant documents are not provided to a party, the whole procedure of issuance of Show Cause Notice would be reduced to an empty formality.
by Yogendra Aldak†, Pranav Mundra†† and Balraaj Singh Chhatwal†††
“While deciding that whether a debt is a financial debt or an operational debt arising out of a transaction covered by an agreement or arrangement in writing, it is necessary to ascertain what is the real nature of the transaction reflected in the writing.”