Main reasons for the delay is the spate of litigations by the promoters. Once the CIRP order is passed, the promoters get into the action with the sole objective of getting back the company at a cheaper price.
the advance copy of the Application for initiating CIRP under Section 7, Section 9, or Section 10 of IBC, 2016 needs to be served to the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Board of India.
The lease premium and rent given to the Corporate Debtor are not included in Section 14(1)(D) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
A key element that differentiates the IBC from previous legislation governing corporate insolvency is the distribution waterfall in the event of liquidation.
interim finance can be raised by the resolution professional appointed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). The resolution professional is authorized to raise interim finance after obtaining approval from the Committee of Creditors (CoC).
The Apex Court used its authority under Article 142 to allow the CIRP proceedings to be withdrawn and to adjudicate all outstanding issues between the parties in the greater interest of the homebuyers.
The resolution professional (RP), appointed under the Code, is at the heart of these endeavors and has the mandate to complete this process in a time-bound manner.
The claims filed/to be submitted by the workers of the appellant must be decided upon and taken into consideration by the Liquidator even if RP has not submitted the claims towards the wages/salaries as part of CIRP costs.
Specifically in insolvency proceedings, mediation as a tool can be employed to resolve issues and clear the bottleneck in the resolution process which had led to delays.
The Pre-Packaged Insolvency Resolution Process (PPIRP) mechanism have helped the MSMEs to a great extent in order to revive their operations as a going concern.
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.
The Bangalore Sales Corporation v Sark Spice Products Pvt. Ltd., the National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”), Kochi Bench, comprised of Shri. P. Mohan Raj (Judicial Member) and Shri. Satya Ranjan Prasad (Technical Member), held that an unregistered Partnership Firm cannot institute insolvency proceedings under IBC.
Homebuyers could only engage in the IBC procedure as a class of financial creditor. Individual homebuyer rights were absorbed by homebuyer rights as a class.
For India’s distressed debt, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 (IBC) was a game-changing change. It developed a tool to revitalize struggling distressed debtors, heralding a shift from previous resolution and recovery methods.
A person to whom a debt has been properly assigned or transferred is also included in the definition of “Financial Creditor” under Section 5(7) of the IBC.
join For Updates