Tag: NCLAT

limitation in Operational Claims Supreme Court on Invoices

In Operational Claims Arising Out Of Several Invoices, Those Invoices Falling Within The Three-Year Period Preceding The Date Of Filing Should Be Considered For The Purposes Of Limitation: Supreme Court

The Hon’ble Division Bench, Supreme Court of India, comprising of Justice Shri. Mukesh Kumar Rasikbhai Shah and Justice Shri C.T Ravikumar in the matter of M/s. Next Education India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s. K12 Techno Services

ADJUDICATING AUTHORITY HAS NO JURISDICTION TO MODIFY A RESOLUTION PLAN: NCLAT

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, comprising of Justice Rakesh Kumar Member and Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra in Mathuraprasad C Pandey & Ors. v Partiv Parikh & Anr.1, vide Judgement dated

IBC: AN ASSIGNEE IS a financial creditor under ibc and can continue CONTINUING PROCEEDINGS initiated under SECTION 7 by the assignor – nclat

The Hon’ble Division Bench, National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, (NCLAT) comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chiarperson) and Baru Mitra, Member (Technical) in Siti Networks Ltd. vs Assets Care & Reconstruction Enterprise Ltd. & Anr (Comp.

Impact of Provident Fund Dues on Approval of Resolution Plans under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

Employee Provident Fund (“EPF”) dues pertain to contributions that are to be made by the employer on behalf of the employee as a part of the employee welfare scheme mandated by the Employees Provident Fund

Margin Money is not included as Security Interest under the IBC and is not an asset of the Corporate Debtor: NCLAT Principal Bench

The Hon’ble Division Bench, National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, (NCLAT) Principal Bench-New Delhi, comprising of Justice Anant Bijay Singh, Member (Judicial) and Ms. Shreesha Merla, Member (Technical) in Punjab National Bank v. Supriyo Kumar Chaudhari and Ors.1

india law

NCLT CAN ISSUE NON BAILABLE WARRANT AGAINST PERSON UNDER IBC: NCLAT

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”) in Vikram Puri vs Universal Builders1 held that the adjudicating authority has jurisdiction under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 (“IBC”) to issue non-bailable warrant against persons. The decision was

1 2 3