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 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.
There is no specific threshold limit for the NCLT Delhi under the IBC 2016. The IBC provides that a financial creditor, operational creditor, or the corporate debtor itself can initiate the insolvency resolution process with the NCLT.
An application filed to initiate CIRP against the petitioners under Section 7(2) of the IBC Vidarbha Industries Power Limited v. Axis Bank Limited.
NCLT specified the dress code for NCLT President, NCLT Members, Legal Practitioners, Authorized Representatives, Interim Resolution Professional, Liquidator, Resolution Professional, and parties present in person.
The Bangalore Sales Corporation v Sark Spice Products Pvt. Ltd., the National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”), Kochi Bench, comprised of Shri. P. Mohan Raj (Judicial Member) and Shri. Satya Ranjan Prasad (Technical Member), held that an unregistered Partnership Firm cannot institute insolvency proceedings under IBC.
The court fined the suspended director of the corporate debtor (the applicant) Rs. 1 lakh for starting several legal actions to obtain the same remedy and wasting valuable judicial time.
Buyers say that RERA orders are not getting implemented and this is forcing them to approach NCLT and there is a need to check abuse and maximize the value of assets.
The Hon’ble NCLAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi held that the IBC does not vest the power to NCLT to Suo-moto classify a transaction as Preferential Transaction under Section 44 r/w Section 45 of IBC.
The Adjudicating Authority cannot allow or approve the application regarding modifications or withdrawals of CoC-approved Resolution Plans once the plan has been submitted before NCLT.
Different forums provide for different reliefs and one must be cautious enough before choosing an appropriate forum. Before choosing the appropriate forum, points to be analyzed are type of violation by the builder, what relief is prayed for, urgency, repetitive nature, financial condition of the builder, status of other projects, etc.
A dispute arose after the completion of the liquidation proceeding and whether the dispute relates to special legislation, such as the Copyright Act, where civil courts have been granted exclusive jurisdiction.
This judgement is a step in the right direction because it recognizes the authority of a non-petitioning creditor to request for a transfer of the winding up proceedings. It assures that A creditor is not deprived of their right just because they didn’t participate in the initial winding up procedure against corporate debtor.
Since the Limitation Act is applicable to applications filed under Sections 7 and 9 of the Code from the inception of the Code, Article 137 of the Limitation Act gets attracted. “The right to sue”, therefore, accrues when a default occurs.
The Supreme Court of India defined Section 60(5) of the Code as a residuary jurisdiction vested in the NCLT, allowing the NCLT to decide all questions of law or fact arising out of or in relation to the corporate debtor’s insolvency resolution or liquidation under the Code.