Secured Creditor's Security Interest Becomes Part Of Liquidation Estate If Amount As Stipulated Under Regulation 21A(2) Is Not Deposited Within 90 days: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that If a secured creditor who has chosen to realize its security interest under Section 52 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code) fails to deposit the amount as stipulated under Regulation 21A(2) of the Liquidation Regulations within 90 days from the liquidation commencement date, the security shall become part of the ...

Delivery Of Demand Notice To Last Known Address Of Personal Guarantor Shall Be Deemed Valid Service U/S 95(4) Of IBC: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that delivery of a demand notice to the last known address of the personal guarantor, as stipulated in the deed of guarantee, shall be deemed valid service for the purposes of Section 95(4) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code). Brief Facts: Sanction Letter- issued in favour of...

Application U/S 9 Of IBC Cannot Be Admitted When Debt Is Discharged By Corporate Debtor After Receipt Of Demand Notice: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that Insolvency proceedings under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code) cannot be initiated if the debt in question has been discharged and settled between the parties after the issuance of demand notice under section 8 of the Code. Brief Facts: The Corporate Debtor...

Allottee Cannot Be Considered Financial Creditor When Allotted Unit Is Cancelled At Their Request: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that an allottee of a unit cannot be considered a financial creditor if the allotted unit was canceled at their request and the loan taken to purchase the flat was settled with the lending bank. Brief Facts: Gaurav Jindal (Appellant) was allotted Flat No.C-103 on payment of Rs.29 lakhs on 04.06.2015. The entire payment of...

NCLAT Dismisses Senior Advocate's Plea Over Non-Payment Of Over ₹6 Crore In Fees By Company, Says Pre-Existing Dispute Bars Initiation Of CIRP

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, consisting of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Arun Baroka (Member - Technical), dismissed an appeal arising from the final order by the NCLT New Delhi Bench-IV regarding the initiation of CIRP under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC).The appeal was filed by a Senior Advocate seeking CIRP over non-payment of fees. The NCLAT concurred with the ruling of the Adjudicating Authority,...

Adjudicating Authority Can Extend Time For Payment Of Sale Consideration Beyond 90 Days U/S 35 Of IBC Read With Rule 11 Of NCLT Rules: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that the 90-day period for payment of sale consideration under Schedule 1, Clause 1(12) of the Liquidation Regulations, 2016, is mandatory and can only be extended by the Adjudicating Authority, not the Liquidator. Brief Facts: The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the...

CoC Cannot Remit Approved Resolution Plan Post-Submission To Adjudicating Authority: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Barun Mita (Technical Member) and Arun Baroka (Technical Member) have held that once a resolution plan has been approved by the CoC and submitted to the Adjudicating Authority, the CoC cannot seek remit it back to the CoC for fresh consideration. Brief Facts On 13.10.2020, the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT, Chandigarh bench) admitted the Section 9 application under IBC...

Resolution Plan Can Be Approved Beyond 330-Day Time Limit If There Are Valid Grounds For Extension: NCLAT New Delhi

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, consisting of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson), Barun Mitra (Member - Technical), and Arun Baroka (Member - Technical), dismissed an appeal arising from an order by the NCLT Ahmedabad Bench-II regarding the initiation of CIRP under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The tribunal held that even if the timeline has been exhausted, the resolution plan can still be approved, especially when...

While Deciding Application U/S 7 Of IBC, Adjudicating Authority Is Not Required To Interfere With Terms Of Contract Between Parties: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that while dealing with an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code) neither the Adjudicating Authority nor the Appellate Authority is expected to interfere with the terms of the contract entered into between the concerned parties. All that is required to be seen is whether the debt and default...

After Submission Of Final Revised Resolution Plan Within Stipulated Time Frame, Resolution Applicant Cannot Be Permitted To Modify It: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that After submission of the final revised Resolution Plan within the stipulated timeframe, the Resolution Applicant cannot be permitted to modify it. Brief Facts: On an Application filed by State Bank of India (“SBI”) under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code)...

Successful Resolution Applicant Can Be Directed To Make Upfront Payment To Dissenting Financial Creditors If Resolution Plan Includes Such Provision: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that the Successful Resolution Applicant(SRA) can be directed to make an upfront payment to the dissenting financial creditors under the Resolution Plan when there is a clause in the Plan itself providing for such payment. Brief Facts: Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against...

Adjudicating Authority Cannot Direct Committee Of Creditors To Consider Expression Of Interest Submitted After Due Date: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that when the Committee of Creditors (CoC) has decided not to accept Expressions of Interest (EoI) submitted after the due date, the Adjudicating Authority cannot direct fresh consideration of such EoI by the CoC. Brief Facts: The last date for submitting EoI was 24 July 2023. The Appellant...