CIRP proceedings could be initiated against both corporate co-borrowers, but the recovery of the same amount could not be made from both parties: SC

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.


Being the least expensive and less time-consuming, Mediation is popular ADR in India. The mediator plays the role of a neutral party who helps the parties to have direct communication and assists in exploring the options and a mutually accepted agreement.

Section 33(5) of IBC doesn’t bar legal proceedings against a ship owned by Corporate Debtor in liquidation: Bombay HC

It is evident upon reading Section 33(5) that this clause merely forbids the filing of a lawsuit or other legal action against the Corporate Debtor. It in no way precludes the filing of a lawsuit or starting another legal action against a ship or vessel owned by the corporate debtor.

Cheque Bouncing Versus Insolvency– Whether proceedings under Section 138 and 141 of N.I. Act, 1881 can be initiated against Corporate Debtor during Moratorium period?

The institution or continuation of a proceeding of dishonour of cheque against company under the provisions of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1888 fall within the ambit of moratorium provision of the IBC.

Unregistered Partnership Firm Cannot Initiate Insolvency Proceedings Under IBC: NCLT Kochi

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.

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.

Article 1 of the Limitation Act, is not applicable to proceedings under the IBC Laws

Article 137 is having a wider scope than Article 1 of the Limitation Act and is not applicable to the proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Article 1 is also not applicable to the petition filed by the Operational Creditor under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

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.

Creditors can request for a transfer of the winding up proceedings to NCLT: Supreme Court

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.

What does the Supreme Court say on the application of the Limitation Act to NCLT proceedings?

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.

Gujarat High Court on banks’ statutory right to initiate Proceedings against Loan Defaulters

Gujarat High Court dismissed Essar Steel’s petition and refused to grant any of the reliefs sought by Essar Steel. The Gujarat High Court moved quickly and efficiently, and the order was issued within 10 working days of Essar Steel’s filing of the case.

NCLAT rules that telecom spectrum can be subjected to IBC proceedings

NCLT clarified many controversial legal issues surrounding telecom spectrum, including whether it could be subjected to IBC proceedings whether the bankrupt telcos could sell spectrum rights allotted to them as part of the IBC resolution process.

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.

Relief for MSMEs in Response to COVID-19, No Fresh Insolvency Proceedings for 1 Year

The Ministry of Corporate Affairs had earlier limited initiation of fresh insolvency proceedings for a period of 6 months which now stands extended to 1 year.

Insolvency Proceedings Limited to Individual Project and not other Projects of Real Estate Company: NCLAT

The NCLAT held that CIRP against Real Estate Company shall be limited to Project concerned and will not affect other projects of the developers.