Supreme Court
When Does Debt Become Financial Debt & Operational Debt Under IBC? Supreme Court Explains
In a significant development, the Supreme Court on Thursday (April 25) held that debt would be treated as an operational debt only if the claim subject matter of the debt has some connection or co-relation with the 'service' rendered by the creditor to the debtor."Where one party owes a debt to another and when the creditor is claiming under a written agreement/ arrangement providing for rendering 'service', the debt is an operational debt only if the claim subject matter of the debt has some...
Process For IBC Offences To Be Issued By Sessions Court Despite Companies Act Amendment Vesting Jurisdiction On Judicial Magistrate: Supreme Court
Observing that the offences committed under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”) would be tried by the Special Court established under Section 435 of the Companies Act, 2013 and the sessions judge would have the power to issue process against the accused, the Supreme Court on Friday (April 19) upheld the issuance of process by the sessions judge to the accused.The Court rejected the contention of the accused contention that the Sessions Judge wasn't empowered to issue process to the...
IBC | Resolution Plan Approved By CoC Can't Be Withdrawn or Modified By Resolution Applicant: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court reiterated that once a resolution plan is approved by the Committee of Creditors (“CoC”) then it becomes impermissible for the resolution applicant to withdraw or modify the resolution plan. The Bench Comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta referred to the Judgment of Ebix Singapore Private Limited v. Committee of Creditors of Educomp Solutions Limited and Another, where the Supreme Court elaborated and set out several reasons why the resolution applicant cannot...
Monthly Digest Of IBC Cases: February 2024
Supreme Court IBC | Resolution Plan Requires Closer Examination If Plan Envisages Use Of Asset Owned By Statutory Authority: Supreme Court Case Title: Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority Versus Prabhjit Singh Soni & Anr. Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL NOS.7590-7591 OF 2023 The Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice of India Dr. DY Chandrachud, Justice J.B. Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra, has observed that ordinarily feasibility and viability of a resolution...
Weekly Digest Of IBC Cases: 12th To 18th February 2024
Supreme Court IBC | Resolution Plan Requires Closer Examination If Plan Envisages Use Of Asset Owned By Statutory Authority: Supreme Court Case Title: Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority Versus Prabhjit Singh Soni & Anr. Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL NOS.7590-7591 OF 2023 The Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice of India Dr. DY Chandrachud, Justice J.B. Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra, has observed that ordinarily feasibility and viability of a resolution...
IBC | Claim Submitted With Proof Cannot Be Overlooked Merely Because It Was Submitted In Wrong Form: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Monday (February 12) observed that the claim submitted by the Resolution Applicant (“RA”) under the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) cannot be rejected/overlooked merely on the fact that the claim submitted appears to be in a different form other than the form in which the claim needs to be submitted. In the instant case, the resolution application has submitted a claim to the Resolution Professional (“RP”) under Form C of Regulation 8 of CIRP Regulations...
IBC | Moratorium Under S 14 No Bar To Execute Decree Against Directors/Officers Of Corporate Debtor: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has held that the imposition of moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”) has no effect on the execution of a decree against the Directors or Officers of the Company (Corporate Debtor), which is undergoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) under IBC.When the Company was admitted into CIRP, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (“NCDRC”) declined to permit execution of a decree against the Company and also its...
IBC | Inappropriate For NCLAT To Direct NCLT To Admit Petition Under Section 7 Without Evaluating Rival Contentions On Merits: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has set aside an order passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”) whereby the National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”) was directed to admit a petition under Section 7 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”).The Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Justice J B Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra, has held that it was inappropriate for the NCLAT to direct the NCLT to admit the application under Section 7 of IBC...
IBC | Statutory Set Off Or Insolvency Set Off Inapplicable To Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has held statutory set off or insolvency set off is not applicable to Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”). Further, Regulation 29 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016 (“Liquidation Regulations”), which provides for mutual dealing and set off, does not apply to Part II of the IBC which deals with CIRP.The principle of Set-off recognizes the right of...
IBC - Is Dissenting Financial Creditor Entitled To Minimum Value Of Security Interest? Supreme Court Refers To Larger Bench, Doubts Precedent
The Supreme Court has referred to larger bench the issue whether a dissenting financial creditor is to be paid the minimum value of its security interest as per the Insolvency and the Bankruptcy Code 2016.A bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and SVN Bhatti, in the case DBS Bank Ltd Singapore v. Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd and another, referred the following question : Whether Section 30(2)(b)(ii) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 20161, as amended in 2019, entitles the...
IBC- Properties Sold In Auction Sale Before Declaration Of Moratorium Can't Be Treated As Liquidation Asset : Supreme Court
Recently, the Supreme Court (on December 06) observed that the properties of a defaulting borrower sold in an auction sale could not be treated as liquidation assets if the sale was concluded before the declaration of a moratorium under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016.While doing so, the Bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Vikram Nath set aside the order passed by the National Company Appellate Tribunal, Delhi (NCLAT).The facts of the present case revolve around the insolvency of Amrit...