For Resolution Plans involving combinations, Resolution Plan can be tabled for Committee of Creditors’ approval only after obtaining the requisite approval by the Competition Commission of Inda

The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India (“Supreme Court”) by a 2:1 majority in Independent Sugar Corporation Limited v Girish Sriram Juneja and Ors1, has held that in case of resolution plans proposing a combination (i.e., a merger or amalgamation of the entities) of a corporate debtor, the Competition Commission of India (“CCI”) must first grant the necessary approval before such Resolution Plan is placed before the Committee of Creditors (“CoC”) for it

Filed under:
India, Competition & Antitrust, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, JSA, Merger control, Insolvency, Competition Commission of India, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (India), National Company Law Tribunal
Authors:
Dheeraj Nair , Nisha Kaur Uberoi , Varghese Thomas , Fatema Kachwalla , Rahat Dawan , Vishrutyi Sahni , Kabir Saund , Pramothesh Mukherjee
Location:
India
Firm:
JSA
Extension of time to complete CIRP will commence from the date on which the Adjudicating Authority passed the order for such extension

On February 21, 2024, the Hon’ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Chennai (“NCLAT”) in the case of Kiran Martin Gulla RP of Vardharaja Foods Pvt. Ltd. held that when an extension to complete the corporate insolvency resolution process (“CIRP”) is granted by the Adjudicating Authority, then such period will be calculated form the date on which the Adjudicating Authority passes such an order.

Brief Facts

Filed under:
India, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, JSA, Debtor, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (India), National Company Law Tribunal
Authors:
Varghese Thomas , Fatema Kachwalla , Virgil Braganza
Location:
India
Firm:
JSA
JSA represented a financial creditor in a significant judgment where the Supreme Court has upheld the constitutional validity of Sections 95 to 100 of the IBC (concerning insolvency resolution process of individuals/personal guarantors and partnership firms)

In the case of Dilip B Jiwrajka v Union of India & Ors, a 3 (three) judge bench of the Supreme Court of India (“SupremeCourt”) has upheld the constitutional validity of Sections 95 to 100 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”).

Background

Filed under:
India, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, JSA, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (India), Supreme Court of India
Authors:
Sidharth Sethi , Pragya Chauhan , Avinash Das , Soumitra Majumdar , Fatema Kachwalla , Bhaskar Dhandharia
Location:
India
Firm:
JSA