Amounts Reflected In Corporate Debtor's Records Can't Be Rejected Even If No Formal Claims Are Filed Before Resolution Professional: NCLT Mumbai

The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Mumbai bench of Justice Shri V.G. Bisht and Shri Prabhat Kumar (Member Technical) has held that amounts reflected in the books of the Corporate Debtor cannot be rejected even if no formal claims are filed by the Creditors. This Application has been filed on 03.04.2024 by Union of India Through its Secretary, Department of Telecommunication (DOT/Applicant) under Section 60(5) of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 in the Corporate Insolvency...

Adjudicating Authority Must Pass Liquidation Order U/S 33(4) Of IBC Upon Breach Of Resolution Plan By Successful Applicant: NCLT Mumbai

The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Mumbai bench of Lakshmi Gurung (Member Judicial) and Hariharan Neelakanta Iyer (Member Technical) has held that once the Successful Resolution Applicant fails to comply with the terms of the Resolution Plan despite several reminders being given, the Adjudicating Authority is mandated to pass an order of liquidation under section 33(4) of the IBC. The present application has been filed under section 33(3) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code,...

Writ Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked When Party Has Already Approached DRT Under SARFAESI Act: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition while upholding that if a borrower has already approached the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) under the SARFAESI Act, for a one-time settlement, a writ seeking the same relief under Article 226 of the Constitution is not maintainable. Background of the Case The petitioner has availed the credit facilities from the consortium of banks, i.e., Punjab National Bank, Indian Bank, and UCO Bank. Later on, the account of the petitioner was declared...

Set-Off Of Fixed Deposit Against Overdraft Based On Pre-CIRP Contract Does Not Violate Section 14 Of IBC: NCLT Bengaluru

The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Bengaluru Bench, has held that the set-off of a fixed deposit against an overdraft, based on an untainted contract entered into before the commencement of the CIRP, does not breach Section 14 of the IBC, nor do such deposits form part of the Corporate Debtor's asset pool. This Application has been filed on 05.11.2024 under section 14 and section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 read with Rule 11 of the National Company Law...

Procedural Direction To File An Affidavit On Ledger Accuracy Is Not Appealable U/S 61 Of IBC: NCLAT Chennai

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench, comprising Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma (Member – Judicial) and Jatindranath Swain (Member – Technical), has held that the procedural direction requiring the appellant to file an affidavit confirming the accuracy of certain ledger transactions could not be appealed. The appeal was preferred u/s 61 of the IBC. Background of the Case The appellant, who happens to be the erstwhile director of Samaara Leathers Pvt. Ltd., has...

Ratification Of IRP Fees By CoC Can Be Implied From Meeting Minutes And Conduct: NCLAT Chennai

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench, comprising Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma (Member – Judicial) and Jatindranath Swain (Member – Technical), has addressed the question of whether ratification of fees and expenses payable to an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) must be express and recorded formally, or it can be implied from the conduct and minutes of the CoC. The bench held that the formal ratification is not mandatory if the CoC's conduct and meeting...

CIRP Cannot Be Sustained If Default Is Cured Before Admission Of Section 9 Application: NCLAT New Delhi

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Barun Mitra (Member – Technical), has ruled that the application u/s 9 of the IBC, 2016, cannot be sustained if the operational debt is settled before the date of admission. Background of the Case Section 9 IBC application, seeking CIRP of the corporate debtor, was filed by the operational creditor. During the pendency of proceedings, the operational creditor...

NCLAT Grants Extension Of CIRP Timeline To Enable Voting On Revised Resolution Plan

M/s Shri Ram Switchgears Limited (“Corporate Debtor”) was admitted into Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) on 29.02.2024. The Adjudicating Authority granted an extension of the CIRP up to 24.05.2025. Before the expiry of the timeline on 24.05.2025, the Committee of Creditors (“CoC”) in its meeting held between 09.05.2025 and 14.05.2025, resolved with 96.94% vote share to seek a 30-day extension and exclusion of 148 days due to delays caused by the replacement of Interim...

Financial Creditor Can't File Same Claim Twice For Same Loan In Multiple Insolvency Proceedings Without Proper Adjustment: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member), Mr Naresh Salecha (Technical Member) and Mr. Indevar Pandey (Technical Member) has held that a financial creditor is not permitted to file the same claim twice for the same loan in multiple insolvency proceedings without proper adjustment. In the present case, the Appellant filed the same claim in two separate proceedings without disclosing the claims filed in an earlier ...

Intervention Application U/S 60(5) Of IBC Can't Be Entertained Beyond Limitation Period Of Three Years: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member) and Mr. Indevar Pandey (Technical Member) has held that Intervention Application under section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) cannot be entertained beyond the limitation period of 3 years. The present appeal has been filed by the Corporate Person through its Liquidator against an order passed by National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) by which it...

Reopening Case Reserved For Orders Without Hearing Affected Party Violates Principle Of Audi Alteram Partem: NCLAT Chennai

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench, comprising Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma (Member – Judicial) and Jatindranath Swain (Member – Technical), has held that an order reserved for the pronouncement cannot be reopened and altered based on a unilateral mention made by a non-party without hearing the affected party. Background of the Case The appellant filed four applications before the adjudicating authority against the four individuals, who were the personal...

Amount Paid By Co-Applicant From Account Other Than That Of Corporate Debtor Is Not Covered U/S 43 Of IBC, Reversal Can't Be Directed: 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 the amount paid by the co-applicant of the corporate debtor during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), from an account other than that of the corporate debtor, cannot be directed to be reversed by the Adjudicating Authority, as it does not fall under Section 43 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). ...