[Rohan Deshpande practices as a counsel at the Bombay High Court, and would like to thank Mihir Naniwadekar for his comments on a draft version] Section 4 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 sets out the threshold of default for the purpose of invocation of insolvency proceedings under the Code. If a corporate debtor commits a default in repayment of debt towards a financial or an...
Rajasthan High Court on Prior-period Claims in Resolution Plans
[Megha Mittal and Shreya Jain are Associates at Vinod Kothari & Co.] A resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Cody, 2016 is the revival route for a corporate debtor, free of its past liabilities and dues, paid in accordance with the approved plan. Having said so, it might be noted that resolution plans assume the status of a statutory binding contract once approved by the...
Covid-19 Crisis: Analyzing the Reforms to Insolvency and Bankruptcy Laws
[Karan Sahi is a corporate lawyer and company secretary by profession, and Pranay Bhattacharya is a 3rd year BA LLB (Hons.) student at the Maharashtra National Law University, Aurangabad] The changing market dynamics from the coronavirus (“Covid-19”) has impacted almost every sector. The pandemic has not only caused global business disruption by halting the international trade, it has also...
The (Active) Involvement of Directors during Insolvency Proceedings
[Kushagra Srivastava is a 3rd year B.A.L.L.B. (Hons.) student at National Law Institute University, Bhopal] Section 17(1)(a) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (the “Code”) vests the management of the affairs of a corporate debtor in the interim resolution professional (“IRP”) on the insolvency commencement date in accordance with section 16 of the Code. This implies the imposition of...
IBC Threshold Raised: Analysis and Implications
[Megha Mittal and Shreya Jain are Associates at Vinod Kothari & Co.] The seemingly low threshold of Rs. 1,00,000 for the initiation of insolvency proceedings has been a persistent concern given the possibility of its exploitation by frivolous actions. While rumours about raising the threshold limit for initiating insolvency process have long been swirling, the recent outbreak of Covid-19 came...
Position of Third Party Security after Jaypee Infratech
[Ankesh Kumar is a IV Year student at NLIU Bhopal] Anuj Jain v Axis Bank Limited witnessed the Supreme Court ruling on two important matter in Indian insolvency law. As summarized in this post, while the Court set aside the transactions in question as being preferential within the meaning of section 43 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), it went on to decide that creditors taking third...
IBC Ordinance, 2019: Impleadment of Allottees in a Pending Application
[Pareekshit Bishnoi is an advocate based in Delhi] The President of India on 28 December 2019 promulgated the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Amendment (Ordinance) Act, 2019 (the “Ordinance”) to amend several provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (the “Code”). Pertinently, section 3 of the Ordinance amended section 7 of the Code by adding three provisos to it. The provisos have limited...
Reverse CIRP: Reflections on NCLAT’s Legal Experimentation
[Ankit Tripathi is a practicing advocate before the Supreme Court and Delhi High Court and Ravleen Chhabra is a final year student at Institute of Law, Nirma University] A recent ruling of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”) in Flat Buyers Association v. Umang Realtech Pvt. Ltd. comes as a game-changer. It not only affects the existing corporate insolvency resolution process...
Supreme Court Rules on Preferential Transactions in Insolvency
In Anuj Jain v. Axis Bank Limited (26 February 2020), the Supreme Court was concerned with the validity of certain transactions that the corporate debtor carried out in the run up to its insolvency. Briefly, the corporate debtor, Jaypee Infratech Limited (JIL), mortgaged some of its assets in favour of certain and banks and financial institutions for loans they advanced to JIL’s parent company...
Section 29A of the IBC: Stretched Too Far?
[Shruti Kunisetty is a III Year B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) student at the National Law School of India University, Bangalore] Section 29A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (the “IBC”) bars certain entities from submitting a resolution application in insolvency proceedings. Broadly, there are four categories of entities that are barred under this provision: (i) ineligible persons, (ii) persons...
Recent Comments