The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is not Interest Recovery Code

NCLT held that the “interest” component alone cannot be claimed or pursued, in absence of the debt, to trigger a CIRP against the corporate Debtor. Further, the application pursued realization of the interest amount alone is against the intent of the IBC, 2016.


To provide a relief to MSME and to offer them some respite from this pandemic, the process of pre-packaged insolvency resolution was introduced. This PIRP was introduced by way of ordinance dated 04.04.2021 by the Ministry of Law and Justice.

Position of home buyers in the case of Insolvency

The allottees are left helpless when the developers stands either insolvent or incapable of delivering the possession even after passage of years beyond the date of delivery.

Enforcement of Arbitration Award via Insolvency Proceedings: A Contrary Perspective

The enforcement proceedings for the foreign award (under S. 47-48) are the last and final stage where the debtor can resist the award from becoming binding/ enforceable for grounds listed under Section 48 of the Arbitration Act.

Limitation and Insolvency Laws (IBC)

The apex court held that the Code isn’t a machinery for recovery though its usage in several perspectives still be within the nature of a recovery system.

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Bill, 2021

The Code was enacted in 2016 to consolidate and amend the laws governing corporate reorganization and insolvency resolution for corporations, partnerships, and individuals.

Supreme Court on constitutional validity of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

IBC is economic legislation and that when it comes to economic legislation, flexibility should be given to the legislature because no economic law can be fool proof at its inception.


IBC was introduced to reorganise, restructure or to consolidate the existing framework into a single law for the purpose of Insolvency and Bankruptcy.

What is PPIRP (Pre-Packaged Insolvency Resolution Process) ?

PPIRP (Pre-packaged Insolvency Resolution Process) is an alternate for normal Insolvency Process. It has been announced for MSME Sector.

NCLT has jurisdiction over contractual disputes that arises solely on account of Insolvency

The NCLT and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) have to ensure that they do not usurp the legitimate jurisdiction of other courts, tribunals and for when the dispute is one which does not arise solely from or relate to the insolvency of the Corporate Debtor.

Winding up Proceedings will not create any bar for Initiation of the Insolvency Proceedings

The appeal before the Apex Court was filed by the bunch of employee’s union against the impugned judgment of the Rajasthan High Court whereby, the High Court refused to transfer the winding up proceedings before the NCLT, and further set aside an order passed by the NCLT initiating the CIRP application by virtue of section 7 application filed by the Financial Creditor.

Winding up Proceedings will not create any bar for initiation of the Insolvency Proceedings

These two judgements would be of great importance because they have paved a way for the transfer of post-notice winding up petitions pending before the different High Courts.

Reverse Insolvency- Legal Remedy to Homebuyers as Group to get the Project Completed

The reason for stalling of a project can be one or many but the real objective for a homebuyer is to get the best possible remedy which protects the interest of all homebuyers of such a project.


Many Homebuyers are confused between RERA and Reverse Insolvency, and it’s hard to decide which one is better. So here we are explaining the concept of RERA vs Reverse Insolvency.

Group Insolvency- The Future of Successful Resolution under IBC

It is advisable to the creditors to make a plea of initiating Group Insolvency while filing an application for initiation of CIRP against a corporate debtor.