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).
ARBITRATION
Date: 09 December, 2025
Case Name: Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. BCL Secure Premises Pvt. Ltd. Civil Appeal No. 14647 of 2025
Forum: Supreme Court
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) has issued the Insolvency Professionals to act as IRPs, RPs, Liquidators and Bankruptcy Trustees (Recommendation) (Second) Guidelines, 2025, which will govern appointments for the period January 1, 2026 to June 30, 2026.
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) has released two notable discussion papers, namely, Minimum Shareholding Requirements for Directors and Partners of IPEs dated November 17, 2025, and Standardised Templates for Beneficial Ownership and Section 32A Affidavits dated November 6, 2025. Together, these papers propose substantive reforms intended to enhance governance discipline within Insolvency Professional Entities (IPEs) and improve the quality, uniformity, and reliability of disclosures in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).
Summary: In EPC Constructions India Ltd. v. Matix Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd., the Supreme Court addressed whether holders of non-cumulative redeemable preference shares can initiate insolvency proceedings under Section 7 of the IBC, as financial creditors. The Court held that preference shareholders are not creditors and cannot trigger insolvency proceedings, as preference shares remain part of the share capital even upon maturity, and conversion of debt into preference shares permanently extinguishes the original creditor relationship.
The insolvency framework governing real estate projects in India has undergone a significant transformation with the recognition of “Reverse CIRP”, a judicial innovation designed to protect homebuyers’ interests while ensuring completion of stalled real estate projects. This mechanism was recently endorsed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”) in the Satish Chander Verma v. Grand Reality Private Limited[1] ("Grand Reality Case").
The Supreme Court of India (“Supreme Court”), in Mansi Brar Fernandes vs. Shubha Sharma and Anr. inter alia held that ‘speculative investors’ cannot be permitted to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”) and has laid down certain key principles and criteria for determining who a ‘speculative investor’ would be.
Brief facts