Jasmine Buildmart Pvt. Ltd. i.e., the corporate debtor (Jasmine) introduced a Gurgaon based housing project i.e., Krrish Provence Estate. The homebuyers of Krrish Provence Estate made an application for initiation of corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) against Jasmine before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) as Jasmine could not complete the project even after a period of eight years. Additionally, the homebuyers sought a refund of approximately INR 69 million on the grounds of inordinate delay.
Vigilantibus, et non dormientibus, jura subveniunt is a noted maxim which means ‘the laws assist those who are vigilant, not those who sleep over their rights‘ . This is a pertinent principle which applies predominantly while determining if a particular cause of action has been espoused within the limitation period.
Decided on 18 January 2022| Supreme Court of India
This article was first published in India Business Law Journal on 4 March 2022
Introduction:
Between the lines... For Private Circulation-Educational & Information purpose only Vaish Associates Advocates… Distinct. By Experience. I. NCLAT: No possibility negotiating the resolution plan in the intervening period between approval by the CoC, and pending the approval of the NCLT. The Hon’ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (“NCLAT”) has in its judgment dated January 27, 2022, in the matter of Union Bank of India v. Kapil Wadhawan and Others [Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.
INTRODUCTION
The rapid growth of technology, trade, and the corporate world has resulted in the rising number of multinational entities eventually creating a borderless relation among countries and businesses.
In the present times, almost every country has trade relations extending beyond one jurisdiction. Having a presence in various jurisdictions also results in having creditors and debtors situated at various such locations. This makes the insolvency process including overlapping of different laws and proceedings, a complicated process.
INTRODUCTION 今回のニュースレターでは、2022 年 2 ⽉の破産倒産法関連の主なアップデートについて取り扱ってい ます。最⾼裁判所（＝SC）、会社法上訴審判所（＝NCLAT）、会社法審判所（＝NCLT）にて下された 重要な判決についてまとめました。 1) NCLT CAN ENTERTAIN PETITION RELATED TO PERSONAL GUARANTEES OF CORPORATE DEBTOR, EVEN IF THE CORPORATE DEBTOR WAS ADMITTED INTO CORPORATE INSOLVENCY RESOLUTION PROCESS AND RESOLUTION PLAN IS APPROVED Matter: State Bank of India v. Savita Gowda Order date: 20 January 2022 Summary: Sharon Bio-Medicine Ltd. （＝Sharon Bio-Med）に対して会社破産処理⼿続（＝CIRP）が開始され、 NCLT にて再建計画が承認されました。
今回のニュースレターでは、2022 年１⽉の破産倒産法関連の主なアップデートについて取り扱ってい ます。最⾼裁判所（＝SC）、会社法上訴審判所（＝NCLAT）、会社法審判所（＝NCLT）にて下された 重要な判決についてまとめました。 1) ADVANCE EXTENDED BY A DIRECTOR TO THE COMPANY IS A FINANCIAL DEBT Matter: Mrs. Jayanthi G. Ravi v. Chemizol Additives Pvt. Ltd. Order dated: 03 January 2022 Summary: 本件は、Chemizol Additives Pvt. Ltd. （＝Chemizol）の元取締役である Jayanthi G. Ravi （＝債権者） が、Chemizol への融資を巡り、破産⼿続きの開始を NCLT に求めたものです。NCLT は、融資⾦額が⾦ 融債務であるか否かが明確でないという理由で、申⽴てを棄却しました。Chemizol と債権者の間にロー ン契約が存在せず、取締役会や株主の事前承認が得られていないことも論点の 1 つでした。当該 NCLT の命令に対して、異議が唱えられました。