Tag: NCLAT

Can a delay caused by a stay granted by a Higher Court in implementation of a Resolution Plan be excluded from the time given for the implementation of the Resolution Plan

Can a delay caused by a stay granted by a Higher Court in implementation of a Resolution Plan be excluded from the time given for the implementation of the Resolution Plan?

Saturday July 20, 2024. BY Malavika Sachin and Soham Gadgil | Insolvency & Bankruptcy

Introduction: In the matter of Majestic Auto Limited v. Sharan Hospitality Pvt Ltd. & Anr.[i], the Hon’ble NCLAT held that when a Higher Court grants a stay order which puts an embargo on implementation of

Related Parties of the Corporate Debtor cannot circumvent Proviso to Section 21(2) of IBC by Assignment of Financial Debt to a Third Party NCLAT Delhi

Related Parties of the Corporate Debtor cannot circumvent Proviso to Section 21(2) of IBC by Assignment of Financial Debt to a Third Party: NCLAT Delhi

Tuesday July 2, 2024. BY Shradha Patil and Vanshika Mathur | Insolvency & Bankruptcy

Introduction In the case of Peanence Commercial Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. v. Mamta Binani (RP for Rolta India Limited)[1], the Hon’ble NCLAT upheld the decision of NCLT Mumbai Bench stating that merely assignment of financial

Section 5(2) of the SARFAESI Act contains a deeming clause that allows the ARC to pursue the Section 7 IBC proceedings, in cases where an Assignment Agreement is duly registered: NCLAT Delhi

Section 5(2) of the SARFAESI Act contains a deeming clause that allows the ARC to pursue the Section 7 IBC proceedings, in cases where an Assignment Agreement is duly registered: NCLAT Delhi

Wednesday June 26, 2024. BY Malavika Sachin and Vanshika Mathur | Insolvency & Bankruptcy

In the case of Emta Coal Ltd. v. L&T Finance Ltd. and Anr., the National Company Appellate Tribunal vide Order dated 28.05.2024 held that when debt assignment is registered without raising any objections regarding inadequacy

Determining if a cost incurred by a Resolution Professional during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) qualifies as a CIRP cost.

Whether A Cost Incurred By Resolution Professional During CIRP Qualifies as CIRP Cost?

Friday May 31, 2024. BY Malavika Sachin and Abdullah Qureshi | Insolvency & Bankruptcy

Introduction In a recent ruling dated 14.05.2024, in the case of Avil Menezes (Liquidator) v. Abdul Qudduskhan and Anr,[i] the Hon’ble NCLAT, New Delhi, clarified that the mere fact that dues have arisen during the

Arvind Dham v. State Bank of India case.

“NCLAT clarify when Interim moratorium commences against the Personal Guarantor, If Section 95 Application is not filed before proper jurisdictional NCLT” – An Analysis of the Mr Arvind Dham v. State Bank of India and Anr. Case.

Tuesday April 23, 2024. BY Narpat Singh and Pooja Parmeshwar | Insolvency & Bankruptcy

Introduction: The case of Mr Arvind Dham v. State Bank of India and Anr. revolves around the admission of Section 95(1) application filed by the State Bank of India against the appellant, Mr Arvind Dham,

The timelines as stipulated in the Code needs to be considered as of directory nature and not as mandatory in nature: NCLAT, New Delhi

Monday April 22, 2024. BY Malavika Sachin and Pooja Parmeshwar. | Bankruptcy Code – Public Announcements

Introduction: In the matter of Vikram Laxman Pawar v. Sripatham Venkatasubramaniam Ramkumar, [i] the Hon’ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) held that the timelines established under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code should be regarded

1 2 3