The Scottish Court of Session considers the interaction of Indian insolvency proceedings for three Scottish Companies that had also been placed into Administration in Scotland.
Background
The Victoria Jute Company Limited ("Victoria"), The Samnuggur Jute Factory Limited ("Samnuggur") and Titaghur plc ("Titaghur") were all incorporated in Scotland, but had been carrying out their business in India.
Background
I. Relief for foreign investors: Supreme Court of India sets aside the Bombay High Court ruling in IDBI Trusteeship Services case The Supreme Court of India in the case of IDBI Trusteeship Services Limited vs. Hubtown Limited (decided on November 15, 2016) set aside a Bombay High Court ruling which had garnered quite a lot of attention among the foreign investors and in the legal circles. N e d e r l a n d s e F i n a n c i e r i n g s- M a a ts c h a p p i j v o o r Ontwikkelingslanden N.V.
Introduction
Questions around the interplay between the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002, the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act 1985, the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act 1993 and the Companies Act 1956 have frequently arisen in various high courts and the Supreme Court.
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) was recently announced as the adjudicating authority for insolvency proceedings relating to companies, limited liability partnerships and other body corporates under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016,(1) with effect from June 1 2016.(2) The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), which will hear appeals from NCLT decisions, has also been established.(3) The NCLT will have 11 benches across India.
The three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court of India in the case of Madura Coats Limited (“the Appellant”) vs.
Presently, prior to a listed Indian company filing a scheme (Scheme) before the High Court for merger/de-merger/amalgamation/reduction of capital (Reconstruction) under the Companies Act, 1956 (Companies Act), it is required to first submit the Scheme to the stock exchange for approval. Upon successful completion of the Reconstruction, the company must ensure that at least 25% of its post-issue capital is offered and allotted to the public.
The Supreme Court of India ("SC") has held that in the event of liquidation of a company, claims of employees have to be considered by the Official Liquidator of the company and not by the Debt Recovery Tribunal ("DRT"). The SC made this decision in the case of Bank of Maharashtra v. Pandurang Keshav Gorwardkar & Ors.1, and laid down certain rules for deciding employee claims.
FACTS
The Supreme Court of India, with respect to the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interests Act, 2002 (“SARFAESI Act”), has held that powers under the Companies Act cannot be wielded by the Company courts to interfere with proceedings by a secured creditor to realize its secured interests in terms of the provisions of the SARFAESI Act