High Courts
Once Arbitral Award Holder Files CIRP Claim, Execution Under Arbitration Law Not Maintainable: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has recently observed that once a decree holder lodges its claim arising out of an arbitral award before the resolution professional during the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP), it cannot pursue parallel execution proceedings under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.A single bench of Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar delivered the ruling in a petition filed by Paharpur Cooling Towers Ltd, seeking enforcement of an arbitral award dated November 12, 2021...
'Not Unknown to Law': Telangana High Court Upholds Reserve Price Reduction After Repeated Failed SARFAESI Auctions
The Telangana High Court has recently upheld the phased reduction of the reserve price fixed for the auction sale of a mortgaged immovable property under the SARFAESI Act and dismissed writ petitions filed by the borrower. A Division Bench of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice Gadi Praveen Kumar affirmed the order of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal and observed that “the process of marking down of the Reserve Price is not unknown to law.” The Bench examined Rule 8(5) of the...
Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Order Treating WBIDC As Unsecured Creditor In Eastern Explosives Liquidation
The Calcutta High Court has recently set aside an order of a single judge of the court's original side, which upheld the official liquidator's decision treating the West Bengal Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. (WBIDC) as an unsecured creditor in the liquidation of Eastern Explosives and Chemicals Ltd.The Court held that once charge documents were submitted prior to adjudication of claims, the official liquidator was bound to consider WBIDC as a secured creditor.“A creditor, of a company...
Liquidator Can Defend Pending Civil Suits Filed Before Liquidation Under IBC: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court has recently held that a liquidator can be impleaded and can defend a civil suit instituted prior to the commencement of liquidation proceedings, observing that the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 does not bar the continuation of such pending suits. “Since Liquidator can sue, I do not see any reason why Liquidator cannot defend an action on behalf of the corporate debtor” Justice Sandeep V. Marne observed.The court clarified that Section 33(5) of the IBC bars...
'Prejudice From Delay Ignored': Delhi High Court Cuts Insolvency Professional's Suspension To Period Undergone
Holding that prolonged delay in disciplinary proceedings had already caused serious prejudice, the Delhi High Court has reduced a one-year suspension imposed by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) on insolvency professional Vikas Prakash Gupta to the period already undergone. Justice Sachin Datta underscored that “Administrative authorities are required to act within a reasonable period, and any prolonged delay must be justified by cogent reasons.” While noting that the...
Kerala High Court Refuses To Interfere With NCLT's Rejection Of Resolution Plan Despite 100% CoC Approval
The Kerala High Court has refused to interfere with the National Company Law Tribunal's rejection of a resolution plan for an insolvent company, even though it had received 100% approval from the Committee of Creditors. A Division Bench of Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. held that the NCLT was acting within its jurisdiction in examining the resolution plan and that writ jurisdiction could not be invoked merely because the tribunal disagreed with the Committee of Creditors. ...
Delhi High Court Sets Aside Arbitration Against Bhushan Steel Following Tata Steel Takeover
The Delhi High Court has set aside an arbitral tribunal order that allowed arbitration to continue against Tata Steel, formerly Bhushan Steel, even after its resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was approved. A single-judge bench of Justice Amit Sharma allowed Tata Steel's writ petition and quashed the tribunal's October 7, 2020 order. The court said that once a resolution plan is approved, it binds all creditors. “The Resolution Plan had attained finality and would be...
Bank Can't Freeze Company's Accounts Solely Over ROC's 'Management Dispute' Tag: Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court has held that a bank cannot freeze a company's accounts merely on the basis of a “management dispute” marking by the Registrar of Companies (ROC), particularly after such marking has been removed on the directions of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA).Justices Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Supratim Bhattacharya made the observation on January 5 while hearing appeals filed by Ravindra Pratap Singh, director of August Agents Limited, challenging the freezing of the...
Delhi High Court Dismisses 'Luxury Litigation' Over Debt Assignment, Reaffirms NCLT Power To Probe Fraud
The Delhi High Court has dismissed what it described as “luxury litigation” challenging a debt assignment, saying issues of fraud or the existence of debt must be decided by the insolvency tribunal, not a civil court. A single-judge bench of Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav rejected the suit at the threshold, holding that it was a “mala fide attempt” built on “clever drafting” to derail proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The court imposed costs of Rs 2 lakh, saying the case...
High Courts Cannot Exercise Parallel Contempt Jurisdiction Over NCLT In IBC Cases: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court on Monday held that contempt petitions alleging breach of orders passed by the National Company Law Tribunal in insolvency cases cannot be filed directly before the High Court. A single-judge bench of Justice Milind N Jadhav said that once contempt powers are conferred on the NCLT by law, the High Court should not exercise parallel jurisdiction. “Hence, once such contempt jurisdiction is vested in the tribunal, this court ought not to exercise parallel contempt...
Arbitral Award Holder Must Return Amount Withdrawn From Court After Insolvency Resolution: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court has held that where an arbitral award passed against a company is under challenge, and the company later successfully comes out of insolvency, the award holder cannot retain money withdrawn from court deposits if the claim itself is wiped out under an approved resolution plan. The court said such amounts must be returned, as the award itself no longer survives. A single-judge bench of Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan, in an order dated December 17, 2025, allowed an interim...