The Supreme Court did not agree to the payment of amounts deposited by the promoter to homebuyers on the grounds that it would be preferential payment to one class of creditors.
IBC was introduced to reorganise, restructure or to consolidate the existing framework into a single law for the purpose of Insolvency and Bankruptcy.
This isn’t the first time the NCLAT has ruled that, IBC rules take precedence over other laws, such as the attachment of corporate debtor’s assets under the PMLA.
NCLT and RERA have different functioning and approach to tackle cases of homebuyers, often homebuyers are confused on which remedy to choose.
The Committee of Creditors (CoC) has complete wisdom and right to decide the fate of the company under CIRP. Lets understand all about Committee of Creditors under Insolvency Laws
The IBC’s applicability to NBFCs is a welcome legislative effort, and the new rules have extended the RBI’s role in performing an NBFC’s CIRP.
Hon’ble SC clarified the position of the homebuyers similar to that of a “financial creditor” under the IBC, after this the homebuyers were at a par with banks and financial institutions.
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.
Homebuyers who had taken a loan from the banks to pay for their flats in the Project, were being harassed by the banks who were forcing the homebuyers to pay their EMIs.
IBC undoubtedly appears to be a better alternative in comparison to RERA. IBC offers a time bound resolution of the grievance of the homebuyers.
The NCLAT held that CIRP against Real Estate Company shall be limited to Project concerned and will not affect other projects of the developers.
Withdrawal of money by a Company director from the accounts of the company during the CIRP, the same will attract criminal proceedings against the Directors
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.
A judgement has been held by Hon’ble Supreme Court that the powers of the NCLT under the IBC do not extend to adjudicating disputes relating to quasi- judicial or statutory authorities.
The Insolvency And Bankruptcy Code (Second Amendment) Act, 2018, the NCLT has been granted powers under Regulation 30A read with section 12A
join For Updates