The promulgation of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) introduced the categorization of creditors as either “financial” or “operational”. The rights and powers of creditors as either financial or operational creditors though treated equally at the stage of initiation of proceedings under IBC, undergo a sea change once proceedings under IBC stands initiated.

With a view to ensure authenticity, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) has mandated a Valuation Report Identification Number (VRIN) for each valuation conducted under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

MONTHLY NEWSLETTER SERIES AUGUST, 2024 | VOL. XV VAISH ASSOCIATES ADVOCATES LEGALAXY WWW.VAISHLAW.COM LEGAL MAXIM Volenti Non Fit Injuria: “No wrong is done to one who consents.” MONTHLY NEWSLETTER SERIES AUGUST, 2024 | VOL.

March, 2024 For Private Circulation - Educational & Informational Purpose Only A BRIEFING ON LEGAL MATTERS OF CURRENT INTEREST KEY HIGHLIGHTS * NCLT: Corporate insolvency resolution process cannot be initiated under Section 7 of IBC based on transfer agreement for purchase of debentures from financial creditors. ⁎ NCLAT: Security for refund of advance amount cannot change the nature of transaction for supply of goods into financial debt.

The real estate industry forms a significant portion of the flourishing Indian economy. However, it is also plagued with inordinate delays, cash-flow issues and anguished homebuyers. The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (“IBBI”) has recently added to the array of steps being taken to address these issues. 

After a long and arduous litigation Jet Airways’ insolvency woes have finally reached a conclusion. At least that is the hope unless the litigation is taken to the Supreme Court. Having said that, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”) in its decision dated 12.03.2024, in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 129 & 130 of 2023, approved the transfer of ownership of Jet Airways to the Jalan Kalrock Consortium (“JKC”). This hopefully leads the path for the commencement of a new era for the airline.

Businesses often rely on trade credit insurance to protect themselves from customers’ inability to pay for products or services. An interesting question that arose recently in the Indian insolvency context was that when a creditor’s claim for pending dues is paid out by an insurer, can the creditor, having received such pay-out, maintain an insolvency action against the debtor? The National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLAT”) has answered this in the affirmative.

The preamble of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (‘Code’) states its objectives, which are maximisation of value of assets, promote entrepreneurship, within the stipulate time frame. Apart from the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Professional (‘CIRP’) or the Liquidation Process, the Code also provides for a class of transactions which can be ‘avoided’ or ‘undone’ by the appointed Resolution Professional (‘RP’) or the Liquidator, by preferring an Application before the Adjudicating Authority.

For industry professionals in India, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, has been a game-changer. The introduction of a formal framework for insolvency resolution has brought much-needed clarity and efficiency to dealing with financial distress. However, the 2019 Regulations introduced a new dimension - the ability for personal guarantors (PGs) to initiate insolvency proceedings. This has significantly impacted the role of Resolution Professionals (RPs).

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”) in Anjani Kumar Prashar v. Manab Datta & Ors, Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.