|
Advanced Search Options
Insolvency and Bankruptcy - Supreme Court - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 171 Records
More information of case laws are visible to the Subscriber of a package i.e:-
Party Name, Court Name, Date of Decision, Full Text of Headnote and Decision etc.
-
2023 (3) TMI 1285
Seeking withdrawal of CIRP under section 12A of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - appeal was preferred against the admission order before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) apparently on the ground that section 9 of IBC petition was not maintainable as there was a pre-existing dispute - HELD THAT:- Regulation 30A of IBBI Regulations was introduced after insertion of section 12A in IBC. It provided the mechanism of dealing with applications filed for withdrawal. Later on, it was substituted by notification dated 25.07.2019 in IBBI Regulations. According to the said provision, withdrawal under section 12A of IBC could be moved before Adjudicating Authority by the applicant through IRP before constitution of the CoC and in case the CoC has been constituted, then also by the applicant through IRP or the RP. However, the ....... + More
-
2023 (3) TMI 897
Modification/alternation of the approved Resolution Plan by the CoC - Resolution Plan was approved with majority of 81.39% voting rights of CoC which is in compliance of Section 30(2) and 30(4) of the IBC - ownership of the Corporate Debtor declared over the trademark after the approval of the Resolution Plan by the CoC - is this action of modification of Resolution Plan is permissible or not? HELD THAT:- It may be relevant to note that the Resolution Plan and particularly Clause 11.12 which has been referred, it is confined to the perpetual exclusive right to use the brands i.e. “Deccan Chronicle” and “Andhra Bhoomi”, etc. by the Corporate Debtor without any financial implications for the purpose of running its business and it was approved by the adjudicating authority under its order dated 3rd June, 2019, but sin....... + More
-
2023 (3) TMI 699
Eviction order - tri-partite agreement - right or interest that the Corporate Debtor has over the property in question, for the purpose of deciding the inclusion of the same in the Information Memorandum prepared by the Resolution Professional under Regulation 36 of the Regulations - Seeking direction to Energy Properties & Others (including Victory) not to obstruct the sole and exclusive possession of the property - issuance of direction to the local district administration to give proper assistance to the Resolution Professional in taking possession of the property so as to discharge his duties under the Code. What is the nature of the right or interest that the Corporate Debtor has over the property in question, for the purpose of deciding the inclusion of the same in the Information Memorandum prepared by the Resolution Profession....... + More
-
2023 (3) TMI 246
Approval of the Resolution Plan pertaining to its dissolution - dissenting debenture holders - power to mould relief and approve the RP - HELD THAT:- A Bench of three Judges of this Court, in the case of SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA VERSUS RAJKUMAR NAGPAL & ORS. [2022 (9) TMI 110 - SUPREME COURT], allowed the appeal, insofar as it held that the SEBI Circular would have retrospective application. However, this Court noted that the RCFL RP was extremely beneficial to debenture holders in as much that, for those with exposure upto Rs. 10 lakhs would receive 100% of their principal amount, whereas those with exposure of more than Rs. 10 lakhs would receive 29.96% of the principal amount, which is greater than the amount of recovery made by secured lenders, who would receive 24.96% of the principal amount. In the present case als....... + More
-
2023 (3) TMI 223
Seeking Approval of Resolution Plan - HELD THAT:- There are no error in the order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal in JET AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE ENGINEERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION VERSUS ASHISH CHHAWCHHARIA RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL OF JET AIRWAYS (INDIA) LTD. & ORS; ASSOCIATION OF AGGRIEVED WORKMEN OF JET AIRWAYS (INDIA) LTD. VERSUS JET AIRWAYS (INDIA) LTD. & ORS. [2022 (11) TMI 332 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI] where it was held that Non-payment of full provident fund amount to the workmen and employees and the gratuity payment till the insolvency commencement date amounts to non-compliance of provisions of Section 30(2)(e) of the Code. However, in the facts of the present case, all other parts of the Resolution Plan have not been found to infirm in any manner, there are no case for interfering with the order approving the Resolution Plan. Appeal dismissed.
-
2023 (3) TMI 3
Approval of Resolution plan - non-payment of the full amount of Provident Fund Dues - violation of provision of Section 30(2)(e) - Time limitation - HELD THAT:- There are no error in the order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in ASSAM TEA EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION VERSUS MR. MADHUR AGARWAL, HAIL TEA LIMITED [2022 (11) TMI 403 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI] where it was held that provident fund dues are not the assets of the Corporate Debtor and they have to be paid in full. Hence, the Appellant was clearly entitled for payment of full provident fund dues i.e. an amount of Rs. 2,10,13,798/-. Appeal dismissed.
-
2023 (1) TMI 195
CIRP proceedings - Operational Creditors - NCLT / NCLAT rejected the application - Scope of arbitration clause - computation of the period of limitation in regard to an application filed under Section 9 of IBC - existence of pre-existing dispute or not - whether the period during which the operational creditor’s right to proceed against or sue the corporate debtor that remain suspended by virtue of Section 22 (1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions Act, 1985) (SICA) can be excluded, as provided under Section 22 (5) of SICA or not - HELD THAT:- Section 22 (1), SICA, would make it clear that there was a statutory bar to take to any proceeding for realisation of a right referred to in the said Section against an industrial company when once an enquiry under Section 16, SICA is pending against it or any scheme referred ....... + More
-
2022 (10) TMI 525
Existence of pre-existing dispute or not - Applicability of provision of Sales of Goods Act, 1930 - NCLT admitted the application - NCLAT confirmed the same - whether the appellant has raised a dispute which can be described as ‘a pre-existing dispute’ as understood by this Court in the decision in MOBILOX INNOVATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS KIRUSA SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED [2017 (9) TMI 1270 - SUPREME COURT]? - HELD THAT:- In this case, a perusal of the notice sent by first respondent and the application under Section 9 of the IBC would show that the case is premised on there being a sale, and there was a ‘debt’ owed by the second respondent under the sale. It means that the cause of action in general law would have been a suit for the price of the goods sold within the meaning of Section 55 of the Act. On 03.11.201....... + More
-
2022 (10) TMI 48
Seeking leave to withdraw the appeal - appellant contends that the NCLAT does not have jurisdiction to keep the appeal pending at this stage when the main proceedings before the NCLT from which appeal arose before NCLAT has been set aside by this Court - HELD THAT:- There are no reason to entertain the applications filed by the intervenors before this Court since in any event they have filed applications before the NCLAT and if the prayer of the appellant to withdraw his appeal is allowed, the said intervenors in any event will have to avail their remedies in accordance with law. Considering the fact that the last order in the appeal before NCLAT is 15.04.2019 and sufficient time has elapsed, the NCLAT is requested to dispose of the application pending before it seeking withdrawal of the appeal, as expeditiously as possible within a period of six weeks from this date. Appeal disposed off.
-
2022 (9) TMI 1012
Initiation of CIRP against two corporate debtors - Joint Liability - co-borrower/guarantor under the Loan-cum-Pledge Agreement - existence of two borrowers or two corporate bodies - scope of Financial Debt - existence of debt and dispute or not - HELD THAT:- It is not in dispute that the Financial Creditor disbursed loan to the tune of Rs.6,00,00,000/- to Premier pursuant to the Loan-cum-Pledge Agreements, executed both by Premier and by Doshi Holdings. Doshi Holdings has been referred to in the agreement as borrower and pledgor. Prima facie, it appears that Doshi Holdings was a party to the Loan-cum-Pledge Agreement in its dual capacity of borrower and pledgor of shares. The Appellate Authority has arrived at the factual finding that Doshi Holdings is also a borrower under the Loan-cum-Pledge Agreement. The factual finding of the Appella....... + More
-
2022 (9) TMI 1011
Seeking withdrawal of application admitted u/s 7 of IBC - Seeking restraint on IRP from constituting a Committee of Creditors (CoC) till the next date of hearing - Section 12A of the IBC read with Rule 11 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 (NCLT Rules) - HELD THAT:- Section 12A of the IBC clearly permits withdrawal of an application under Section 7 of the IBC that has been admitted on an application made by the applicant. The question of approval of the Committee of Creditors by the requisite percentage of votes, can only arise after the Committee of Creditors is constituted. Before the Committee of Creditors is constituted, there is no bar to withdrawal by the applicant of an application admitted under Section 7 of the IBC. The object of the IBC is to consolidate and amend the laws relating to reorganisation and insolvency ....... + More
-
2022 (9) TMI 861
Initiation of CIRP - Period of limitation - condonation of the delay in filing an application or appeal - NCLT dismissed the application - NCLAT allowed the application - HELD THAT:- The condition precedent for condonation of the delay in filing an application or appeal, is the existence of sufficient cause. Whether the explanation furnished for the delay would constitute “sufficient cause” or not would be dependent upon facts of each case. There cannot be any straitjacket formula for accepting or rejecting the explanation furnished by the Appellant/applicant for the delay in taking steps. When an appeal is filed against an order rejecting an application on the ground of limitation, the onus is on the Appellant to make out sufficient cause for the delay in filing the application. The date of enforcement of the IBC and/or the d....... + More
-
2022 (9) TMI 377
Initiation of CIRP - Operational Creditors - whether there was existence of any dispute between the parties or the record of pendency of a suit or arbitration proceedings filed before the receipt of demand notice in relation to such dispute? HELD THAT:- This Court finds that there was a pre-existing dispute with regard to the alleged claim of the appellant against HPCL or its subsidiary HBL. The NCLAT rightly allowed the appeal filed on behalf of HBL. It is not for this Court to adjudicate the disputes between the parties and determine whether, in fact, any amount was due from the appellant to the HPCL/HBL or vice-versa. The question is, whether the application of the Operational Creditor under Section 9 of the IBC, should have been admitted by the Adjudicating Authority. The answer to the aforesaid question has to be in the negative. The....... + More
-
2022 (9) TMI 324
Initiation of CIRP - Corporate Guarantor being a Company - The Company stood guarantor for the loans availed by the three borrowers which are partnership firm and / or proprietary concerns - HELD THAT:- Under Section 7 of the IBC, CIRP can be initiated against a Corporate entity who has given a guarantee to secure the dues of a non-corporate entity as a financial debt accrues to the corporate person, in respect of the guarantee given by it, once the borrower commits default. The guarantor is then, the Corporate Debtor. The issue of whether CIRP can be initiated against the Corporate Guarantor without proceeding against the principal borrower has been answered by this Court in Laxmi Pat Surana [2021 (3) TMI 1179 - SUPREME COURT] where it was held that the liability of the guarantor is co-extensive with that of the Principal Borrower. The j....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 1162
Sale of assets of Corporate debtors - approval by the Core committee by majority - Validity of order of NCLAT permitting the Private Sale of the composite assets of the Corporate Debtor instead of taking the Second Swiss Challenge Process to its logical conclusion - R.K. Industries was declared as an Anchor Bidder - Validity of direction to respondent No.2 - Liquidator to restart the entire process of Private Sale after issuing an open notice to prospective buyers instead of confining the process to those parties who had participated in the process earlier. HELD THAT:- On a conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions of the IBC and the Liquidation Regulations, it is evident that the Liquidator is authorized to sell the immovable and movable property of the Corporate Debtor in liquidation through a public auction or a private contract, ei....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 1161
CIRP - Recovery of customs duty - adjudication of Bill of entry after initiation of Corporate Insolvency process - Release of certain goods lying in the Customs Bonded Warehouses without payment of custom duty and other levies - waterfall mechanism under Section 53 of the IBC - priority of IBC over the Customs Act - Power of respondent to claim title over the goods and issue notice to sell the goods in terms of the Customs Act when the liquidation process has been initiated. HELD THAT:- In the present case, the Corporate Debtor as part of its business used to regularly import and warehoused goods in the custom bonded warehouses from at least 2011. As has already been mentioned above, the CIRP process commenced against the Corporate Debtor on 01.08.2017 by the order of the NCLT. It appears from the record that no notices were issued by the....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 329
Initiation of CIRP - NCLT admitted the application - NCLAT quashed the proceedings - Financial Creditors - Period of limitation - HELD THAT:- It is clear that any agreement to pay a time barred debt, would be enforceable in law, within three years from the due date of payment, in terms of such agreement. It appears that Section 25(3) of the Indian Contract Act was not brought to the notice of the NCLAT. The NCLAT also did not consider the aforesaid Section. Under Section 25(3), a debtor can enter into an agreement in writing, to pay the whole or part of a debt, which the creditor might have enforced, but for the limitation of a suit in law. A written promise to pay the barred debt is a valid contract. Such a promise constitutes novation and can form the basis of a suit independent of the original debt, for it is well settled that the debt....... + More
-
2022 (8) TMI 70
Initiation of CIRP - Period of limitation - to be recognized from the date of NPA or Balance Sheet recognizing the debt - Respondents argued that the Appellant was relying on the Financial Statements from 2014-15 onwards as acknowledgments to save limitation - whether Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) initiated by the Appellant against the Corporate Debtor, V. Hotels Ltd. was barred by limitation? - HELD THAT:- On a careful reading of the provisions of the IBC and in particular the provisions of Section 7(2) to (5) of the IBC read with the 2016 Adjudicating Authority Rules, there is no bar to the filing of documents at any time until a final order either admitting or dismissing the application has been passed - The time stipulation of fourteen days in Section 7(4) to ascertain the existence of a default is apparently director....... + More
-
2022 (7) TMI 1037
Initiation of CIRP - NCLT rejected the application - NPA - Period of limitation - NCLT that, a statement contained in the balance sheet cannot be treated as an acknowledgement of liability under Section 18 of the Limitation Act - Proposal of OTS is older than 3 months - HELD THAT:- The decisions in Sesh Nath Singh [2021 (3) TMI 1183 - SUPREME COURT], Laxmi Pat Surana [2021 (3) TMI 1179 - SUPREME COURT] and Asset Reconstruction Company [2021 (4) TMI 753 - SUPREME COURT] have subsequently been followed in numerous decisions of this Court delivered by two-Judge Benches, namely: Dena Bank v C. Shivakumar Reddy [2021 (8) TMI 315 - SUPREME COURT], STATE BANK OF INDIA VERSUS VIBHA AGRO TECH LIMITED [2021 (10) TMI 1348 - SUPREME COURT], Devas Multimedia Private Ltd. v Antrix Corporation Ltd. and Another [2022 (1) TMI 774 - SUPREME COURT] and SVG ....... + More
-
2022 (7) TMI 581
Refusal to stay the proceedings initiated by the Respondent, Axis Bank Limited against the Appellant - solvent companies, temporarily defaulting in repayment of its financial debts - initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under Section 7 of the IBC - HELD THAT:- From a perusal of the application filed by the Respondent Financial Creditor under Section 7(2) of the IBC in the statutory form, a copy whereof is included in the Paper Book, it is apparent that the Respondent Financial Creditor filed the application in the NCLT for initiation of CIRP against the Appellant in its individual capacity and not as lead bank on behalf of the other creditors. The Respondent Financial Creditor claimed that a total amount of Rs.553,27,99,322.78 was due from the Appellant Corporate Debtor to the Respondent Financial Creditor, of ....... + More
........
|
