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.
Hon’ble Supreme court declared that the provisions of IBC (Code) to be interpreted liberally to expand the objective of the Statute.
Claim of the rental lease will be treated as operational debt under Section 5(21) of the code as per the decision given by the Hon’ble NCLAT.
Home buyers who have an order/decree/award for refund passed either by RERA or any consumer court or any court of law, can approach the NCLT under Section 7 of the Code for its default/non-payment, giving a new cause of action for the limitation period from the date the default occurred.
The apex court held that the Code isn’t a machinery for recovery though its usage in several perspectives still be within the nature of a recovery system.
Calcutta High Courts held that moratorium under Section 14 of IBC also includes criminal proceedings for cheque bounce cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, thus parallel proceedings against a corporate debtor cannot be allowed.
The Supreme Court of India has cleared the way for lenders to file insolvency proceedings against personal guarantors of stressed companies, who are typically promoters.
The Committee of Creditors (CoC) is the preeminent dynamic body in a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). Choices with respect to the organization of the corporate borrower are taken at the gatherings of the Committee, in light of a dominant part vote of the individuals.
Creditors who fails to the submit the claims with proof within 14 days can submit their claims within 90 days from the Insolvency Commencement date as per the amendment of Regulation 12(2).
Resolution applicants enter the CIRP and prepare “Resolution Plans,” which are effectively instruments for taking over a corporate debtor, paying its creditors’ debts, and completing its recovery and restructuring.
Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that in an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, the applicant can claim the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, in respect of proceedings under the SARFAESI Act.
The IBC recognizes homebuyers under financial creditors to protect their rights even when a creditor, other than a homebuyer, invokes insolvency proceedings against the builder.
The default occurred after the cut-off date, the NCLAT held that the bar imposed under Section 10A was clearly attracted.
It is advisable to the creditors to make a plea of initiating Group Insolvency while filing an application for initiation of CIRP against a corporate debtor.
IBC undoubtedly appears to be a better alternative in comparison to RERA. IBC offers a time bound resolution of the grievance of the homebuyers.
join For Updates