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.
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.
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of the committee of creditors (CoC) and that is pending the approval of the adjudicating authority can be modified or withdrawn by a resolution applicant under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 (the Code).
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.
Background