Implications of cheque bounce under Insolvency Laws (IBC)
Cheque bouncing is also the default in making payment of debt, and petition under IBC laws may be admitted
Cheque bouncing is also the default in making payment of debt, and petition under IBC laws may be admitted
The NCLAT held that CIRP against Real Estate Company shall be limited to Project concerned and will not affect other projects of the developers.
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.
The provisions Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 specifically provides for treatment for all sums due to any workman or employee from the provident fund
The reviewing court can reverse the original decision or amend it as needed. With the passing of time, the judiciary has been paving the way for clearing the doubt regarding the power to review and recall.
The fast track process which can be initiated by a creditor or the corporate debtor itself cuts down the time taken to complete an insolvency resolution to almost half as compared to the regular process under the IBC.
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.
An application filed to initiate CIRP against the petitioners under Section 7(2) of the IBC Vidarbha Industries Power Limited v. Axis Bank Limited.
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.
A key element that differentiates the IBC from previous legislation governing corporate insolvency is the distribution waterfall in the event of liquidation.
In the recent case given by the retired Hon’ble Supreme court Judge CJI Ramana. He said that in case of any conflict, the IBC will override the Customs Acts.
The Apex Court used its authority under Article 142 to allow the CIRP proceedings to be withdrawn and to adjudicate all outstanding issues between the parties in the greater interest of the homebuyers.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 Corporate Debtor would carry on construction and out of total saleable construction 32% will be of landowner and remaining 68% will be of the Corporate Debtor.
Since a specific limitation period for filing such an appeal is clearly mentioned, Section 17 of the Limitation Act could not be applied here.
The Successful Resolution Applicant requested Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (hereinafter referred to as MIDC) for a new water connection to revive the operations at the plant of the Corporate Debtor.