NCLT Chennai Explains The Difference Between Sale Of 'Corporate Debtor As A Going Concern' U/R 32(E) And Sale Of 'Business Of The Corporate Debtor As A Going Concern' In IBC

The Division Bench of NCLT, Chennai consisting of R. Sucharitha, Judicial Member and Sameer Kakar, Technical Member in the case of M.S. Viswanathan v. Pixtronic Global Technologies Pvt. Ltd. allowed the Liquidator to sell the Corporate Debtor as a going concern, while clarifying that 'sale as a going concern' means sale of both assets and liabilities, if it is stated on 'as is where is basis'. The Liquidator of Gemini Communications Ltd., who is the Applicant in the present case, sold...

No Conflict Between Section 17B Of The PF Act And IBC, NCLAT Directs Full Payment Of PF

The NCLAT, Principal Bench consisting of Justice Ashok Bhushan, Chairperson and Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra, Technical Member in the case of Sikander Singh Jamuwal v. Vinay Talwar held that there is no conflict between the provisions of Section 17B of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and directed the Resolution Applicant to pay PF dues to the employees. An appeal was filed u/s 61 of the IBC by the Appellant,...

Failure To Reply To Demand Notice U/S 8(1) Within 10 Days Does Not Preclude The Corporate Debtor From Raising The Existence Of A Dispute In A S. 9 Application: NCLAT, New Delhi

The NCLAT, Principal Bench comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan, Chairperson and Dr. Alok Srivastava, Technical Member, in the case of M/s. Brand Realty Services Ltd. v. M/s. Sir John Bakeries India Pvt. Ltd. held that the mere fact that the corporate debtor did not reply to the demand notice by the Operational Creditor u/s 8(1) within 10 days or that the corporate debtor did not file a reply to the demand notice does not preclude the corporate debtor from bringing on record evidence to...

Proceedings U/S 95 Of The IBC Shall Abate On Death Of The Personal Guarantor: NCLT, New Delhi

NCLT, New Delhi bench consisting of Justice Ramalingam Sudhakar and Sh. Hemant Kumar Sarangi in the case of Alchemist Asset Reconstruction Company v. Mr. Deepak Puri rejected an application filed by the Financial Creditor u/s 95 of the IBC, 2016 against the Personal Guarantor of the Corporate Debtor on the ground that after death of the Personal Guarantor, the proceedings against him shall abate. The Financial Creditor, through the Resolution Professional filed an application u/s 95 of...

Whether Claim Of License Fee For Use And Occupation Of Immovable Premises Is An Operational Debt U/S 5(21), IBC? : NCLAT Refers To Larger Bench To Consider

The Principal Bench of the NCLAT in a Bench consisting of Justice Ashok Bhushan, Chairperson, Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra and Dr. Alok Srivastava, Technical Members in Jaipur Trade Expocentre Pvt. Ltd. v. Metro Jet Airways Training Pvt. Ltd. referred the issue of whether the claim of the Licensor for payment of License Fee for use and occupation of Immovable Premises for commercial purposes is a claim of 'Operational Debt' within the meaning of Section 5(21) of the Code to a larger bench of 5...

NCLAT: Joint Development Agreement Between Lessee And Corporate Debtor Valid; NOIDA's Appeal Dismissed, Right To Submit Claim Closed To Protect CIRP Timelines

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi has dismissed the Appeal preferred by New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) against the NCLT, New Delhi's order directing NOIDA to "lodge its due claim with Resolution Professional as per law and participate in the CIRP process through duly Authorised person and attend all future CoC meetings participate in the discussions/negotiations on the Resolution Plans submitted by prospective Resolution Applicants, and give...

Majority Homebuyers Accept Builder's Settlement During CIRP; Supreme Court Allows Withdrawal Of Insolvency Application

The Supreme Court has allowed withdrawal of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against a builder in an application filed by three homebuyers in view of a settlement plan agreed upon by the majority of them. In the larger interest of the homebuyers, the Apex Court exercised power under Article 142 to permit withdrawal of the CIRP proceedings and set aside all matters pending between the parties. While allowing the application, a Bench comprising Justices M.R. Shah and B.V....

Decree Holders As Creditors Under The IBC - Need For Clarity

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("Code"), right from its enactment has been the subject of legal debate. While various issues that have cropped up from time to time, have been ironed out, by amendments and by judgements, there still exist a plentitude of legal questions, waiting to be raised in the right case. One such question is the status of a "decree-holder" as a creditor. Section 3 (10) of the Code, defines a "creditor" as "any person to whom a debt is owed and includes...

Suspended Board of Directors Has No Power To Replace RP Under IBC: NCLAT, Chennai

The NCLAT, Chennai in a Bench consisting of Justice M. Venugopal, Judicial Member and Kanthi Narahari, Technical Member in the case of Anil Kumar Ojha v. Chandramouli Ramasubramaniam Resolution Professional of SLO Industrial Ltd. & Anr. held that the suspended Board of Directors has no power under the IBC to appoint a Resolution Professional. The power to do so has only been vested in the Committee of Creditors (CoC) and then the Adjudicating Authority (AA). The NCLAT dismissed the ...

Retired Partner Cannot Initiate Proceedings Under IBC Against Other Partners Or Firm For Retirement Dues: NCLT, Mumbai

The NCLT, Mumbai Bench consisting of Kishore Vemulapalli, Judicial Member and Rajesh Sharma, Technical Member in the case of Anil Vora HUF v. Kavya Build-Con Private Limited rejected the Section 9 application filed by the Operational Creditor on the ground that a retired partner cannot initiate proceedings u/s 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 to claim retirement dues against other partners or the Firm. The Applicant/Operational Creditor of the Corporate Debtor filed an...

Personal Guarantors Of NBFC/FSC Cannot Be Proceeded Against Unless Threshold Of Rs. 500 Cr Is Satisfied: NCLT, Jaipur

The Jaipur Bench of the NCLT consisting of Deep Chandra Joshi, Judicial Member and Raghu Nayyar, Technical Member in the case of Shapoorji Pallonji Finance Private Limited v. Rekha Singh held that Personal Guarantors of Non-Banking Finance Company/ Financial Services Provider cannot be proceeded against unless the NBFC/ FSP satisfies the Rs. 500 crore threshold limit under the notification issued u/s 227, IBC. The Personal Guarantors filed applications u/s 60(5) of the IBC seeking...

Initiation of CIRP Not Mandatory For Maintainability Of An Application Against Personal Guarantors U/S 95, IBC: NCLT, Kochi

The NCLT, Kochi Bench comprising of Shyam Babu Gautam, Technical Member and Ashok Kumar Borah, Judicial Member in the case of E. Iqbal v. State Bank of India held that when an application for initiation of CIRP is pending before the NCLT, initiation of CIRP against the Corporate Debtor is not a prerequisite for maintainability of an application u/s 95, IBC filed for initiating IRP against the Personal Guarantor of the Corporate Debtor. The application was filed by the Personal...