The SC has already issued notice and sought a reply from Jaiprakash Associates for the same, due to be heard on 17th October, 2020. The apex court took matters into its own hands and ordered for transfer of cases.
The shareholders and promoters are not the creditors and thereby the resolution plan cannot balance the maximization of the value of assets of the corporate debtor
Earlier the winding up of the company was initiated and conducted under the Companies Act, 1956 while the same has got annulled after the advent of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
The provisions Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 specifically provides for treatment for all sums due to any workman or employee from the provident fund
Any person aggrieved by the order of the Hon’ble Adjudicating Authority i.e. National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”) under Section 61(1) of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC, 2016”) may prefer an appeal before the Hon’ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT).
Interim Finance is defined under Section 5 (15) of the IBC, 2016 which means
The issues that are adversely affecting the efficiency and effectiveness of the resolution process and for increasing the possibility of resolution, value of resolution plan, and ending timely resolution.
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 Operational Creditors are only entitled for minimum of the Liquidation Value and NIL payment to Operational Creditors in case the Liquidation Value is NIL, does not contravene the provisions of Section 30(2)(b) of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
The Apex Court used its authority under Article 142 to allow the CIRP proceedings to be withdrawn and to adjudicate all outstanding issues between the parties in the greater interest of the homebuyers.
Mobilization Advance is an Operational Debt and not a Financial Debt referring to the abovementioned Supreme Court Judgement.
the Resolution Plan in question is in violation of section 30(2) (a) of the IBC. The NCLAT subsequently modified the Resolution Plan to include this claim in accordance with the law.
The actions of the CoC by not accepting the Applicant’s Resolution Plan were void in nature and held that the Applicant must be given a fresh opportunity to participate in the process of submission of the Resolution Plan.
To provide a relief to MSME and to offer them some respite from this pandemic, the process of pre-packaged insolvency resolution was introduced. This PIRP was introduced by way of ordinance dated 04.04.2021 by the Ministry of Law and Justice.
If the corporate debtor’s resolution plan was authorised and declared binding on the corporate debtor and its workers, members, creditors, guarantors, and other stakeholders under Section 31 of the Code, criminal proceedings under Section 138 will continue.
join For Updates