Under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”),the approval of a resolution plan under Section 31 of the IBC is statutorily binding on the corporate debtor, its creditors, and other stakeholders to the restructured arrangement embodied in the plan.
Introduction
Introduction
Introduction
Introduction
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”) which came into force on December 1, 2016, marked a decisive shift in India’s approach to insolvency and its resolution.
The Supreme Court of India ('Court') in UV Asset Reconstruction Company Limited v. Electrosteel Castings Limited, Civil Appeal No. 9701/2024, has delivered a critical judgment clarifying the legal boundaries between a Deed of Undertaking and a Contract of Guarantee under Section 126 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 (‘Act’). The Court's decision underscores that mere commercial nomenclature and internal funding arrangements do not satisfy the rigorous legal requirements of a guarantee.
Factual Background
The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in its recent judgment, examined two (2) important issues under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”). The first concerned the parameters governing the admission of a real estate project into the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”), while the second related to the locus standi of a homebuyers’ association or society seeking to intervene or participate in insolvency proceedings against the developer.
CASE BRIEF
Case Name: Sri Lakshmi Hotel Pvt. Limited & Anr vs Sriram City Union Finance Ltd & Anr.
Case No.: Civil Appeal No. 13785 of 2025
Citation: 2025 INSC 1327
Court: Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Hon’ble Mr. Justice, K.V. Viswanathan
Date: 18 November 2025
1. FACTUAL MATRIX
Background
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) on 22nd December 2025, amended the IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations (CIRP Regulations) to introduce sub-regulation 3A to existing regulation 38 (Amendment).