On July 23, 2024, the finance minister presented a budget focused on job creation, tax reforms, and support for micro, small and medium enterprises (“MSMEs”). For the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”) two reforms were announced: the establishment of an integrated technology platform to facilitate improved outcomes and the strengthening of tribunals and appellate tribunals, including the creation of additional tribunals some of which would be exclusively designated for matters under the Companies Act, 2013.

BACKGROUND

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) has floated a paper which envisages the disclosure of the corporate debtor’s status as a micro, small and medium enterprises (MSME) in the information memorandum. Stakeholders are invited to comment on this proposal by September 12.

The amendments recently notified to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Information Utilities) Regulations, 2017, require the information utility to verify key details such as the e-mail address of the debtor, the document showing proof of debt, etc. before issuance of record of default.

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.

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. 

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).

Against the backdrop of recent judicial precedent, this article delves into the need for a group insolvency framework in India, and analyses the report published by the CBIRC in 2021.

Globalisation has led to a significant increase in the number of enterprises which comprise of several closely connected entities that may operate as a single economic unit. As a consequence, difficulties may arise when 1 or more entities in that single economic unit become insolvent as the inability of 1 entity to pay its debts may impact stakeholders in another entity within the group.

On February 21, 2024, the Hon’ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Chennai (“NCLAT”) in the case of Kiran Martin Gulla RP of Vardharaja Foods Pvt. Ltd. held that when an extension to complete the corporate insolvency resolution process (“CIRP”) is granted by the Adjudicating Authority, then such period will be calculated form the date on which the Adjudicating Authority passes such an order.

Brief Facts