2021年8月27日、インド破産倒産委員会（＝IBBI）は、企業倒産処理手続および清算手続に関する諸問題についてのコメントを募集する旨のディスカッションペーパー（CIRP Discussion Paper、Liquidation Discussion Paper）を発表しました。その後、2021年9月30日、IBBIは、2016年（企業倒産手続）規則（＝CIRP規則）および2016年IBBI（清算手続）規則（＝清算規則）の改正が行われています。

CIRP規則と清算規則にて導入された主な改正点は、以下の通りです。

1. CIRP 規則（CIRP Regulations）

(i) 債権者委員会（＝CoC）の説明責任を高め、機能の透明性を確保するため、CoCのメンバーに対して、IBBIが発行するガイドラインに沿った形での職務の遂行が義務付けられました。

2016年破産倒産法は、目的やプロセスの異なる様々な法律が乱立していた従前と比較して、財務的困難な状況に陥った企業を救済する上で重要な役割を果たしています。破産倒産法の初期の成功要因は種々ありますが、インドの立法府が同法を適切に解釈し、適時に改正してきたことが主な要因として挙げられます。一定の成果を上げている破産倒産法ですが、会社法審判所（＝NCLT）および会社法上訴審判所（＝NCLAT）の機能およびプロセスの合理化には、未だ改善の余地があります。

本記事では、一見すると合理的に見える外部要因を考慮することで、債務不履行に陥った企業債務者が、法に基づく倒産処理手続に異議を唱えることができる根拠を意図せず広げてしまった可能性のある、Air Travel Enterprises India Ltd v. Union Bank of India & Ors.事件におけるNCLATの判決について考察しています。

Facts of the case

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) published discussion papers soliciting comments on issues relating to the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP Discussion Paper) and liquidation process (Liquidation Discussion Paper) on 27 August 2021. The IBBI on 30 September 2021 introduced amendments to the IBBI (Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 (CIRP Regulations) and the IBBI (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016 (Liquidation Regulations).

Between the lines... For Private Circulation-Educational & Information purpose only Vaish Associates Advocates… Distinct. By Experience. I. Supreme Court: Once the resolution plan is approved by the Committee of Creditors and submitted to the Adjudicating Authority, a successful resolution applicant cannot withdraw or modify the resolution plan The Hon’ble Supreme Court (“SC”) has held in its judgment dated September 13, 2021, in the matter of Ebix Singapore Private Limited v. Committee of Creditors of Educomp Solutions Limited and Another (Civil Appeal No.

Decision
Comment

Following several civil appeals, the Supreme Court has decided in its final order and judgment dated 13 September 2021 (the judgment) whether a resolution plan that has already been approved by the requisite majority of the committee of creditors (CoC) and that is pending the approval of the adjudicating authority can be modified or withdrawn by a resolution applicant under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 (the Code).

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code) has played a significant role in rescuing financially distressed companies as compared to the former insolvency law regimes which were provided in various statues having different objectives and processes. The initial success of the Code is attributable to various factors including the manner in which the Indian judiciary interpreted the law as well as the timely amendments of the Code by the Legislature.

INTRODUCTION

This newsletter covers key updates about developments in the Insolvency Law during the month of September 2021.

We have summarized the key judgments passed by the Supreme Court of India (SC), National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) and the National Company Law Tribunals (NCLT). Please see below the summary of the relevant regulatory developments.

Abhishek Tripathi and Mani Gupta, Sarthak Advocates & Solicitors

This is an extract from the 2022 edition of GRR's the Asia-Pacific Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.

In summary

Introduction:

Aggrieved by the order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) refusing to condone a delay of 44 (forty-four) days in filing an appeal against the order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), the Appellant (i.e., National Spot Exchange Limited) preferred an appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. 

The Reserve Bank of India (“RBI”) has, in its capacity as the regulator of non-banking financial companies and under the powers conferred to it pursuant to Section 45-IE (1) of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 (“RBI Act”), superseded the Board of Directors of SIFL and SEFL.

The press release of even date from the RBI also stipulates the following:

1) The step has been taken owing to governance concerns and defaults by SIFL and SEFL in meeting their various payment obligations.