Search Results for: NCLAT

NCLAT Chennai Bench: Tribunal Dismisses Review Application Seeking Recall of Order

In a recent decision, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Chennai Bench, comprising of Justice M. Venugopal, Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, and Shri Jatindranath Swain, delivered a significant verdict regarding the jurisdiction of tribunals in recalling orders. The case in question, titled Adv. (CA) V. Venkata Sivakumar v Hari S. Hari Karthik & Ors., … Continue reading “NCLAT Chennai Bench: Tribunal Dismisses Review Application Seeking Recall of Order”

Appeal to Hon’ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) and limitation period thereof

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).  

NCLT can issue non-bailable warrants against persons under IBC: NCLAT

The directors of the suspended corporate debtor filed an appeal against the National Company Law Tribunal’s (“NCLT”) ruling that rejected their request to have a non-bailable warrant issued against them.

Liquidator Has No Jurisdiction To Reject/Modify Already Admitted Claims, Can Approach AA For Modification: NCLAT Delhi

Liquidator lacks the authority to reject or modify already admitted claims if he receives any new information. Only the Adjudicating Authority may be contacted by the Liquidator to request adjustment of the admitted claims.

NIL payment to OC’s if Liquidation Value is NIL, doesn’t contravene the provisions of S. 30(2)(b) of IBC, 2016: NCLAT, New Delhi

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.

NCLAT Chennai condones a delay of 147 days in filing of Appeal before the Appellate Tribunal

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal in the matter of M. K. Resely & Ors. Vs Union Bank of India has condoned a delay of 147 days in filing of appeal before NCLAT upon equity.

IBC Does Not Prohibit an Assignee from Continuing Pending Section 7 Proceedings: Judgement by NCLAT Delhi

A person to whom a debt has been properly assigned or transferred is also included in the definition of “Financial Creditor” under Section 5(7) of the IBC.

Tax authorities can’t issue notice to freeze accounts of the company during liquidation: NCLAT

The Corporate Debtor went into CIRP vide the Adjudicating Authority (AA) order dated 20.09.2019 and Mr. Hemant Mehta (Appellant) got appointed as Interim Resolution Professional (IRP).

A banker’s Certificate is not mandatory to initiate CIRP under Section 9, NCLAT

A banker’s certificate is not mandatorily required for an operational creditor to begin Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under section 9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Debts incurred during CIRP are also a part of IRP costs, says NCLAT

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.

Hon’ble NCLAT declares claim of the license fee will be covered under the ambit of IBC

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.

CoC is empowered to consider revised financial offers keeping in mind the time limit set out by law: NCLAT

The NCLAT had to decide whether the NCLT/CoC may provide resolution applicants repeated chances to alter their individual resolution plans and whether the CoC was authorised to entertain fresh or revised resolution plans without exhausting available bids.

Petition can be admitted against maintenance company of developer: NCLAT

Section 5(8)(f) Explanation makes it clear that any amount raised from an allottee under a real estate project shall be deemed to be an amount having the commercial effect of a borrowing.

A Deficiency can be correct in Appeal: NCLAT

NCLAT said that if there was deficiency in pleading, the same could be corrected by giving opportunity before this Appellate Tribunal to amend the pleadings. In Appeal naturally pleadings could be by filing Application and reply supported by documents.

Petition liable to dismissed if CD colluded with FC to take benefit of Moratorium: NCLAT

The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the Application and held that it is a case of collusive Application whereby the Corporate Debtor is trying to seek benefits of Moratorium u/s 14 of the IBC and other advantages in accordance with other provisions of IBC 2016.