Pendency of proceedings before debt recovery tribunal cannot affect the petition under 7 of IBC

If some other recovery proceedings are pending or the amount of claim is disputed before other tribunal or adjudicating body that won’t empower the adjudicating authority to reject the petition.

No bar to Initiate Insolvency Proceedings pendency the action under SARFAESI Act or RDBFI Act

The pendency of actions under the SARFAESI Act or actions under the RDDBFI Act, 1993 does not create an obstruction for applying Section 7 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016, especially given Section 238 of IBC.

FUTURE OF MEDIATION IN INSOLVENCY PROCEEDINGS

Being the least expensive and less time-consuming, Mediation is popular ADR in India. The mediator plays the role of a neutral party who helps the parties to have direct communication and assists in exploring the options and a mutually accepted agreement.

Cheque Bouncing Versus Insolvency– Whether proceedings under Section 138 and 141 of N.I. Act, 1881 can be initiated against Corporate Debtor during Moratorium period?

The institution or continuation of a proceeding of dishonour of cheque against company under the provisions of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1888 fall within the ambit of moratorium provision of the IBC.

Gujarat High Court on banks’ statutory right to initiate Proceedings against Loan Defaulters

Gujarat High Court dismissed Essar Steel’s petition and refused to grant any of the reliefs sought by Essar Steel. The Gujarat High Court moved quickly and efficiently, and the order was issued within 10 working days of Essar Steel’s filing of the case.

Winding up Proceedings will not create any bar for initiation of the Insolvency Proceedings

These two judgements would be of great importance because they have paved a way for the transfer of post-notice winding up petitions pending before the different High Courts.

Flat buyers associations are consumers for builders and are entitled to file complaint before Consumer Forum

Hon’ble Supreme Court has reiterated and upheld that legal position of the Flat Buyers Association as consumer and has also made it clear that the builder cannot occupy any place, without the permission of the association, after the project is handed over.

All About- Moratorium and its relevance under IBC

The term Moratorium is nowhere defined in the Code, however, the term in basic parlance means, ”a stopping of activity for an agreed amount of time”. 

Arbitrator- appointment and their multiple aspects

As per the black law dictionary, the arbitrator is a “private, disinterested person, chosen by the parties to a disputed question, for the purpose of hearing their contention, and giving judgment between them; to whose decision(award) the litigants submit themselves either voluntarily, or, in some cases, compulsorily, by order of a court”.

An Interplay between the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 & IBC 2016

the criminal case brought under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the NI Act against the natural persons would not be over by application of the IBC’s provisions.

Artificial Intelligence and Insolvencies

Machine learning, deep learning, artificial neural networks, rule-based expert systems, and natural language processing are a few examples of artificial intelligence technologies employed in worldwide insolvency and bankruptcy processes.

Judges & Social Media: Managing the Risks

Criminal Procedure Jurisprudence explains the evidentiary value that social media posts carry. Certainly, there are advantages and good policy reasons for accessing social media evidence used in criminal proceedings.

NCLT Delhi Imposes Cost of Rs.1 Lakh on Suspended Director

The court fined the suspended director of the corporate debtor (the applicant) Rs. 1 lakh for starting several legal actions to obtain the same remedy and wasting valuable judicial time.

Supreme Court holds that section 7(5) Of IBC is discretionary

VIPL sought for a stay on the proceedings before the NCLT on the pretext of pendency of proceeding before the Supreme Court and resultantly, VIPL was unable to realize a substantial sum of Rs. 1730 crores which would enable the Appellant to clear the debt towards Axis Bank.