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).
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.
CIRP proceedings under section 7 can be initiated against corporate debtors who are co-borrowers but there can be no double recovery of the same amount from both.
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.
Since a specific limitation period for filing such an appeal is clearly mentioned, Section 17 of the Limitation Act could not be applied here.
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.
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.
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 mandatorily required for an operational creditor to begin Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under section 9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
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 Adjudicating Authorities have been given discretionary powers under section 7(5)(a) of I&B Code, 2016. The Authorities are required to apply their mind and take into consideration all facts and circumstances.
Section 7 of the Code permits a financial creditor to initiate a CIRP procedure against the guarantor being a corporate debtor in accordance with the default committed by the principal borrower.
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.
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.
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.
join For Updates