SUPREME COURT
Case Title : Vedanta Limited vs Bhuvan Madan
Case Number : Diary No. 18505 of 2026
Vedanta Ltd has moved the Supreme Court assailing the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal's order declining interim relief against implementation of Adani Enterprises' resolution plan for Jaiprakash Associates Ltd.
The plan, approved by the NCLT on March 17, 2026, with a 93.81% CoC vote, is under challenge over the alleged non-consideration of Vedanta's higher bid in breach of the value maximisation objective under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
Supreme Court Dismisses BCCI Review Against Order Setting Aside NCLAT Decision Closing Byju's CIRP
Case Title : Board of Control for Cricket in India vs Glas Trust Company LLC & Ors
Case Number : REVIEW PETITION (C) in Diary. No. 69532 OF 2025
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz SC 141
The Supreme Court recently dismissed a review petition filed by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) against its October 23, 2024 ruling in the Byju's insolvency case. In that ruling, the court had set aside the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal's approval of a post-admission settlement in the corporate insolvency resolution process of Think & Learn Pvt. Ltd., Byju's parent company.
Case Title : Satinder Singh Bhasin vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors
Case Number : MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.239 OF 2024
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz SC 142
The Supreme Court on Thursday, while considering pleas seeking cancellation of bail granted to Satinder Singh Bhasin, rejected his contention that the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) of Bhasin Infotech and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (BIIPL), of which he is a director, could not question the Rs.50 crore deposited as a bail condition due to the two-year look-back period under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
Case Title : Vedanta Ltd vs Bhuvan Madan & Ors
Case Number : C.A. 4098 OF 2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz SC 145
The Supreme Court on Monday, 6 April, declined to interfere with the implementation of the resolution plan submitted by Adani Enterprises for Jaiprakash Associates Ltd, and directing the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) to expedite hearing of the appeals filed by Vedanta Ltd, scheduled for 10 April.
A Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said:
“In view of the fact that Company Appeal AT (Ins) 552, 553 of 2026 are now listed for final hearing before the NCLAT on 10th April, 2026, we see no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the NCLAT. However, having regard to the nature of the decision and its consequential implications, we request the NCLAT to hear the appeal on out of term basis on the date fixed or immediately on the next working day, if the arguments are not concluded.”
Supreme Court Issues Notice In Homebuyers' Writ Against Ansal Properties' ₹257 Crore Default
Case Title : GENUINE HOMEBUYERS ASSOCIATION FOR RELIEF (GHAR) Versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS
Case Number : Diary No. 11521 of 2026
The Supreme Court on Monday, 6 April, issued notice in a writ petition filed by the Genuine Homebuyers Association for Relief (GHAR), in Uttar Pradesh, challenging the insolvency proceedings against Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Ltd in relation to the Sushant Golf City project in Lucknow.
A Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan, after hearing the homebuyer association, directed that the petition be tagged with the main matter involving Ansal Properties.
HIGH COURT
IBC Moratorium Can't Revive Missed Written Statement Deadline: Delhi High Court
Case Title : IDBI Trusteeship Services Ltd vs Manish Jain & Ors
Case Number : CS(COMM) 800/2025
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 331
The Delhi High Court has recently held that filing an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which allows a defendant to seek rejection of a plaint at the threshold on legal grounds, cannot revive the statutory period for filing a written statement once it has expired. The court clarified that this position would apply even in a case where the defendant had invoked insolvency proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
A bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna was dealing with an appeal filed by a personal guarantor of an insolvency-bound company, against whom personal insolvency proceedings were pending under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. He was challenging an order dated January 27, 2026, whereby the Joint Registrar had closed his right to file a written statement.
NCLAT
Non‑Issuance Of NOCs By Financial Creditor Not Fraud In Insolvency Proceedings: NCLAT New Delhi
ase Title : Mr Hemant Yadav & Ors Vs IDBI Trusteeship Services Ltd
Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) 268/2026 & 269/2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 124
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), New Delhi, on 27 March, held that the non-issuance of No Objection Certificates (NOCs) by a financial creditor cannot be treated as fraudulent or malicious in the initiation of insolvency proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). A Section 7 petition remains valid where a corporate debtor defaults on its debt obligations, irrespective of later contractual disputes with homebuyers.
Case Title : S2 Tech.com India Pvt. Ltd Vs Mr. Birendra Kumar Agarwal, RP & CoC
Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) 456/2024
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 126
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Delhi recently set aside the approval of a resolution plan for Manjeera Constructions Limited after finding that the successful resolution applicant's earnest money deposit was credited three days after the stipulated deadline, rendering the bid non-responsive
A bench of Judicial Member Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma and Technical Member Jatindranath Swain rejected the contention that the requirement stood satisfied since the amount had been debited on the last date and held that actual receipt within the deadline was mandatory.
Case Title : Surender Singh Vs IDBI Trusteeship Services Ltd. & Anr.
Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) 266/2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 125
The New Delhi National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) on 27 March, held that insolvency proceedings in real estate cases must be confined to the specific project for which financing was raised.
A Bench comprising Chairperson Justice Ashok Bhushan and Technical Member Barun Mitra heard an appeal by Surender Singh, the suspended director of Vatika Limited in relation to the “Aspirations” project in Sector 88B, Gurgaon.
NCLAT Upholds NCLT Mumbai Order Directing Eviction Of Unauthorised Occupant In Infra Company CIRP
Case Title : Classic Marble Company Pvt. Ltd v. Truvisory Insolvency Professionals Pvt. Ltd and Anr.
Case Number : CA(AT)(Insolvency)/187/2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 127
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Delhi has upheld an order directing eviction of an unauthorised occupant from a corporate debtor's property during insolvency proceedings. The court upheld the NCLT Mumbai's view that a Resolution Professional can approach the NCLT to secure possession of assets and that requiring separate civil proceedings would “unduly prolong the insolvency process which is a time bound process.”
Case Title : SGN Universal Construction Company Limited Vs Shailendra Kumar Singh & Ors
Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) 2207/2024
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 129
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Delhi has dismissed an appeal by SGN Universal Construction Company Pvt. Ltd. challenging observations made by the NCLT on its claimed rights over Tower 5 of the “Morpheus Bluebell” project in Greater Noida (West), developed by M/s Morpheus Prodevelopers Pvt. Ltd. The appellate tribunal said the Adjudicating Authority had not returned any finding on those claims and that such issues fall for consideration within the insolvency process.
Judicial Custody Of Appellant No Ground To Extend IBC Limitation: NCLAT In Alps Leisure Liquidation
Case Title : Alpesh Vasudev Gandhi v. Vinodkumar S. Shah, Liquidator of Alps Leisure Holidays Ltd.
Case Number : I.A. No. 147 & 477 of 2026 in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 39 & 126 of 2026
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 130
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at New Delhi has recently dismissed two applications as time-barred, holding that judicial custody cannot be used to bypass the statutory limitation period under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The appellate tribunal clarified that Section 61 of the IBC permits condonation only up to 15 days beyond the initial 30-day limitation period and does not allow any extension beyond this outer limit, even if the appellant was in judicial custody.
NCLAT Rejects Successful Bidder's Plea For Post-Sale Reliefs In Veda Biofuel Liquidation
Case Title : Biotech Private Limited v Dr. Kondapalli Venkat Srinivas
Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No. 418/2025 and (IA No. 1198/2025) CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 131
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Chennai has recently upheld the rejection of post-sale reliefs sought by MS Biotech Pvt. Ltd., finding that a bidder who enters an auction on an “as is where is” basis cannot later turn around and ask for concessions beyond what was agreed.
A bench of Judicial Member Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma and Technical Member Jatindranath Swain dismissed the company's appeal against the NCLT, Amravati Bench order dated July 3, 2025.
Case Title : Mr T Venkatram Reddy Vs L & T Finance Limited & Renuka Devi Rangaswamy
Case Number : Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) 383/2022
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLAT 132
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Chennai recently rejected a creditor's attempt to treat a loan default as a “continuing guarantee” to overcome limitation, holding that default under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is a singular event that cannot be stretched to revive time-barred proceedings, especially where the demand notice itself records a specific date of default.
A bench of Judicial Member Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma and Technical Member Jatindranath Swain observed, “So far as we are concerned, having appreciated the arguments extended by the Ld. counsel for the parties, we are of the view that when the statute, quite in its explicit term, while consciously defining the default, has referred to in it the word 'when' and that has been used in context of debt 'whole or in part', it deals with a specific singular event of default, which has to be taken as to be a factor for the purposes of issuance of a notice and those factors are inclusive of a default of a whole amount or a partial amount.”
NCLT
NCLT Bengaluru Says Suspended Director Cannot Challenge Resolution Plan After Skipping CoC Meetings
Case Title : Ms. Disha Choudhary v. Ms. Ramanathan Bhuvaneshwari
Case Number : IA No. 925 of 2024 in CP(IB) No. 113/BB/2022
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (BEN) 268
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) at Bengaluru has held that a suspended director who had notice of meetings of Committee of Creditors but failed to effectively participate or seek documents cannot later challenge the resolution process on that ground.
A coram of Judicial Member Sunil Kumar Aggarwal and Technical Member Radhakrishna Sreepada has dismissed an application filed by a suspended director of an infra company seeking rejection of a resolution plan on the ground of non-supply of documents.
Case Title : State Bank of India v. Shree Padmavati Metaliks Private Limited and Anr. Case Number : IA (IB) No. 1460/ (KB) /2025 & IA (IB) No. 219/ (KB) /2026 In CP(IB) No. 165/( KB) /2022
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (CHE) 271
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Kolkata, has refused to interfere with the bidding process in the insolvency of Shree Padmawati Metaliks Pvt. Ltd., holding that where an applicant, despite opportunity, chose not to participate in the bidding process, no case was made out to declare the process illegal or to direct a re-run of the CIRP.
The bench of Judicial Member Bidisha Banerjee and Technical Member Siddharth Mishra was dealing with applications filed by City Alloys Pvt. Ltd. against the resolution professional and State Bank of India.
Case Title : Malco Gems v. Prince Foundations Limited
Case Number : CP(IB)/29(CHE)/2025
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (CHE) 274
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Chennai has recently held that withdrawal of an insolvency application at the pre-admission stage, even without liberty to file afresh, does not bar a subsequent petition. It ruled that such proceedings are governed by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code as a self-contained framework and not by the Civil Procedure Code.
A coram of Judicial Member Sanjiv Jain and Technical Member Venkataraman Subramaniam admitted a Section 7 application filed by Malco Gems against Prince Foundations Limited. The order initiates the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) against the company.
NCLT Mumbai Admits Authum Investments' Insolvency Petition Against RPL Sunlight Power
Case Title : Authum Investments and Infrastructure Limited vs. M/s RPL Sunlight Power Private Limited
Case Number : C.P. (IB)/13(MB)2025
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (AHM) 276
The Mumbai Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on 26 March, admitted a Section 7 application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, filed by Authum Investments & Infrastructure Limited (erstwhile Reliance Commercial Finance Limited) against RPL Sunlight Power Private Limited. A Bench comprising Judicial Member Nilesh Sharma and Technical Member Sameer Kakar initiated the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) after finding that the Financial Creditor had established the existence of a financial debt and the default exceeding the statutory threshold.
NCLT Guwahati Directs Suspended Directors Of Sree Bajrang Infracon To Cooperate With Liquidator
Case Title : Purushotam Gaggar v. Rakesh Kumar Singh and Anr
Case Number : IA(IBC)/30/GB/2024 in CP(IB)/7/GB/2023
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (GUA) 277
The Guwahati Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on 10 March directed the suspended directors of Sree Bajrang Infracon Pvt Ltd (Corporate Debtor) to fully cooperate with the Liquidator, Purshotam Gaggar, and hand over all records and assets, holding that non-cooperation undermines the time-bound insolvency process under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
A Bench comprising Judicial Member Rammurti Kushawaha and Technical Member Yogendra Kumar Singh emphasised that personnel of the Corporate Debtor, including suspended directors, have a statutory obligation to assist the Interim Resolution Professional, Resolution Professional, or Liquidator.
SCC's Role In Liquidation Only Consultative, Liquidator Has Final Say: NCLT Bengaluru
Case Title : Shri Vijay Pitamber Lulla v. K. Usha Rani and Ors
Case Number : IA No. 1090/ 2025 in CP(IB) No. 122/BB/2017
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (BEN) 280
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) at Bengaluru has directed the liquidator of an infra company to accept a one-time settlement (OTS) offer of Rs 2 crore to break a prolonged deadlock in the liquidation process, holding that the Stakeholders' Consultation Committee (SCC) is only consultative in nature and the ultimate decision-making authority rests with the liquidator.
A coram of Judicial Member Sunil Kumar Aggarwal and Technical Member Radhakrishna Sreepada passed the order.
Case Title : Bank of India vs Pallishree Limited
Case Number : C.P.(IB)No.272.KB.2024
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (KOL) 281
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) at Kolkata recently held that a financial creditor forming part of a consortium of lenders can independently initiate insolvency proceedings under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code without requiring consent from other consortium members, admitting a plea by Bank of India against Pallishree Ltd and triggering the corporate insolvency resolution process.
Going Concern Sale Not Same As Resolution Plan, No Automatic Waiver Of Dues: NCLT Ahmedabad
Case Title : Lemit Paper LLP v. Rajeshkumar Malani .
Case Number : IA/50/(AHM)/2026, CP(IB) No. 83/NCLT/AHM/2023
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (AHM) 285
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) at Ahmedabad has held that a purchaser who takes over a corporate debtor as a going concern during liquidation cannot automatically walk away from past liabilities or statutory dues, making it clear that such a transaction does not stand on the same footing as a resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
The finding came on an application by the successful auction purchaser of Camerich Papers Private Limited. The company had been sold as a going concern through an e-auction held on October 13, 2025, after which the purchaser moved the Tribunal seeking reliefs tied to the acquisition.
Case Title : Prawincharan Prafulcharan Dwary RP in the matter of Mrs Neetima Kad v. Neetima Kad and Ors.
Case Number : IA/612/(AHM)/2025,IA/613/(AHM)2025&IA/614/(AHM)/2025
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (AHM) 288
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) at Ahmedabad has recently held that abstention by creditors cannot be treated as consent while voting on a repayment plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and rejected a proposal submitted by personal guarantors for failing to meet the mandatory voting threshold.
A coram of Judicial Member Shammi Khan and Technical Member Sanjeev Sharma found that the plan received only 21.35% votes in favour, while 20.14% voted against, 42.60% of the voting share abstained, and 15.91% remained absent. The tribunal held that abstention does not count toward approval and cannot be used to satisfy the statutory majority requirement.
Purchaser Cannot Avoid Liabilities Voluntarily Accepted At Auction: NCLT Hyderabad
Case Title : Indian Overseas Bank vs Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Oil Mills Pvt Ltd
Case Number : IA (IBC)/1483/2024 in CP(IB) No.532/7/HDB/2019
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (HYD) 286
The Hyderabad Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on 11 March, held that a purchaser of assets in a liquidation auction cannot resile from liabilities voluntarily accepted at the time of purchase, including outstanding electricity dues.
A Bench comprising Judicial Member Rajeev Bhardwaj and Technical Member Sanjay Puri dismissed the application filed by Sri Lakshminarasimha Oil Mills Pvt Ltd, and refused to direct the Northern Power Distribution Company of Telangana to grant a fresh electricity connection without clearing arrears of Rs. 92.68 lakh.
Case Title : Mr Keshav Khaneja RP of Gensol Engineering Limited Vs Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited
Case Number : IA/1405(AHM)2025 in C.P.(IB)/195(AHM)2025
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (AHM) 290
The Ahmedabad Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has held that Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited's (MAHAGENCO) termination of Gensol Engineering Limited's Rs 292.5 crore EPC contract will remain inoperative during the company's insolvency process.
The order by a bench of Judicial Member Shammi Khan and Technical Member Sanjeev Sharma came on an application filed by Resolution Professional Keshav Khaneja, who sought to restrain MAHAGENCO from giving effect to the termination of the Letter of Award dated October 19, 2023 and the Engineering, Procurement, and Construction (EPC) Contract dated February 21, 2024.
Case Title : SBC MINERALS PVT LTD Vs MR BHUVAN MADAN
Case Number : IA NO.113/2026 In CP (IB) NO.330/ALD/2018
CITATION : 2026 LLBiz NCLT (ALL) 293
The Allahabad Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has recently held that operational creditors cannot seek disclosure of a resolution plan or liquidation value at the pre-approval stage under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code while rejecting a plea arising out of the insolvency of JaiPrakash Associates Limited. Notably, The resolution plan for the company was approved on March 17 in separate proceedings and is under challenge before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal.
IBBI
IBBI Mandates International Valuation Standards for All IBC Valuations
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India has issued a circular notifying the International Valuation Standards as the applicable standards for valuations conducted under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, until further orders. The circular states that one of the objectives of the Code is the maximisation of value of assets of the corporate debtor in a time-bound manner, and that valuation serves as a critical input for evaluation of resolution plans and facilitates informed decision-making by stakeholders.